Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 15. Number 1, March 2024                           Pp.298-313
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol15no1.19

Full Paper PDF   

Malaysian Students’ Perceptions towards Using Peer Feedback to Cultivate Evaluative
Judgement of Argumentative Writing

Xiao Xie
Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia.

Vahid Nimehchisalem
Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia.
Corresponding Author: vahid@upm.edu.my

Mei Fung Yong
Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia.

Ngee Thai Yap
Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia.

 

Received:11/22/2023         Accepted:03/1/2024                   Published: 03/20/2024

 

Abstract:
Although peer feedback is a prevailing practice to promote evaluative judgement, its influence on the development of this higher-order cognitive ability has not yet been adequately explored. Specifically, there is a dearth of research that examines the benefit of providing and receiving peer feedback in developing students’ understanding of assessment standards of writing. The purpose of this study is to explore students’ perceptions of how different feedback roles influenced their three types of evaluative judgement of ESL argumentative writing, namely hard, soft and dynamic evaluative judgement. During five weeks, 24 undergraduate students enrolled in an English argumentative writing course at a Malaysian public university were randomly assigned to three distinct peer feedback roles, namely feedback provider, feedback receiver, or feedback outsider, to participate in the peer feedback activities. Thematic analysis of pre- and post-intervention surveys indicated that different feedback roles varied in facilitating the development of evaluative judgement. Despite the limitation of domain-specific knowledge, strategically integrating peer feedback into writing course design afforded students opportunities to cultivate the three types of evaluative judgement. This study translates the theoretical framework of evaluative judgement into identifiable goals within the course of English argumentative writing and sheds light on the cognitive mechanisms inherent in different feedback roles, which enables educators and researchers to better dissect peer feedback curriculum design and student-centred assessment activity.
Keywords: Argumentative writing, evaluative judgement, feedback roles, Malaysian students’ feedback,
peer feedback, writing domain

Cite as:  Xie, X., Nimehchisalem, V., Yong, M.F., & Yap, N.T. (2024). Malaysian Students’ Perceptions towards Using Peer Feedback to Cultivate Evaluative Judgement of Argumentative Writing. Arab World English Journal, 15(1): .298-313.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol15no1.19

References

Ajjawi, R., & Bearman, M. (2018). Problematising standards: Representation or performance? In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds.), Developing evaluative judgement in higher education: Assessment for knowing and producing quality work, (pp. 41–50). London: Routledge.

Allen, D., & Katayama, A. (2016). Relative second language proficiency and the giving and receiving of written peer feedback. System, 56, 96-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.12.002.

Aryadoust, V. (2012). Evaluating the psychometric quality of an ESL placement test of writing: A many-facets Rasch study. Linguistics Journal, 6(1), 8-33.

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728.

Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462.

Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133.

Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.

Chang, C. Y. H. (2015). Teacher modeling on EFL reviewers’ audience-aware feedback and affectivity in L2 peer review. Assessing Writing, 25, 2-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.04.001.

Chang, C. Y. H. (2016). Two decades of research in L2 peer review. Journal of Writing Research, 8(1), 81-117. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.08.01.03.

Cheng, X., & Zhang, L. J. (2024). Engaging secondary school students with peer feedback in L2 writing classrooms: A mixed-methods study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 81, 101337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101337.

Chong, S. W. (2021). University students’ perceptions towards using exemplars dialogically to develop evaluative judgement: The case of a high-stakes language test. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 6(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-021-00115-4.

Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107.

Gan, Z., He, J., Zhang, L. J., & Schumacker, R. (2023). Examining the relationships between feedback practices and learning motivation. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 21(1), 38-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2022.2061236.

Gao, Y., An, Q., & Schunn, C. D. (2023). The bilateral benefits of providing and receiving peer feedback in academic writing across varying L2 proficiency. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 77, 101252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101252.

Gao, Y., Schunn, C. D. D., & Yu, Q. (2019). The alignment of written peer feedback with draft problems and its impact on revision in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(2), 294-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1499075.

Goodyear, P., & Markauskaite, L. (2018). Epistemic resourcefulness and the development of evaluative judgement. In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds.), Developing evaluative judgement in higher education: Assessment for knowing and producing quality work, (pp. 28–38). London: Routledge.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.

Huang, Y., & Zhang, L. J. (2022). Facilitating L2 writers’ metacognitive strategy use in argumentative writing using a process-genre approach. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 1036831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1036831.

Huisman, B., Saab, N., Van Driel, J., & Van Den Broek, P. (2018). Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6), 955-968. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1424318.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing. Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues, (pp. 1-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Joughin, G. (2018). Limits to evaluative judgement. In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds.), Developing evaluative judgement in higher education: Assessment for knowing and producing quality work, (pp. 60–69). London: Routledge.

Kim, M. (2009). The impact of an elaborated assessee’s role in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930801955960.

Luo, J., & Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). Conceptualising evaluative judgement in the context of holistic competency development: Results of a Delphi study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(4), 513-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2088690.

Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293-308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003.

Nelson, R. (2018). Barriers to the cultivation of evaluative judgement: A critical and historical perspective. In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds.), Developing evaluative judgement in higher education: Assessment for knowing and producing quality work, (pp. 51–59). London: Routledge.

Nicol, D. J. (2014). Guiding principles for peer review: unlocking learners’ evaluative skills. In C. Kreber, C. Anderson, N. Entwistle, & J. McArthur (Eds.), Advances and innovations in university assessment and feedback (pp. 197–224). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.

Nicol, D. J., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518

Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43, 591-614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x.

Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2022). Effects of an engaging process-genre approach on student engagement and writing achievements. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 38(5), 487-503. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1982431.

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714.

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76, 467-481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3.

Tai, J., Canny, B. J., Haines, T. P., & Molloy, E. K. (2016). The role of peer-assisted learning in building evaluative judgement: Opportunities in clinical medical education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 21, 659-676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9659-0.

Tsui, A. B., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9.

Vasu, K., Ling, C. H., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2016). Malaysian tertiary level ESL students’ perceptions toward teacher feedback, peer feedback and self-assessment in their writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(5), 158-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.5n.5p.158.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Weir, C. (1990). Communicative language testing. London: Prentice-Hall.

Xie, X., Nimehchisalem, V., & Rafik-Galea, S. (2022). Paradigm shifts in peer feedback within learning-oriented language assessment. ASEAN Journal of Applied Languages, 1(1), 20-34.

Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016). Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014). Language Teaching, 49(4), 461-493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000161.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Tumblr
Reddit
Email
StumbleUpon
Digg
Received: 11/22/2023
Accepted: 03/1/2024 
Published: 03/20/2024
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3388-7464
https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol15no1.19 

Xiao Xie is a PhD candidate majoring in the English Language, at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, UPM, Malaysia. He graduated from Sichuan University and Sun Yat-sen University, China. He takes a lively interest in peer feedback, argumentative writing and language assessment literacy. Email: gs58879@student.upm.edu.my
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3388-7464

 Vahid Nimehchisalem holds a PhD in TESL. He’s an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, UPM. Learning-teaching materials evaluation and language assessment are his main areas of research interest. He’s chief editor of the International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies and managing editor of the Journal of Language and Communication (JLC). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5454-1895

 Mei Fung Yong holds a PhD in Linguistics and Second Language Teaching from Massey University, New Zealand. She served as an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, UPM, before her recent retirement. Her areas of research interests include collaborative project-based writing, game-based learning, self-assessment, and second language learning. E-mail: yong@upm.edu.my    ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5363-1864

 Yap Ngee Thai has a PhD in Linguistics. She is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, UPM. Her work primarily involves second language acquisition and learning, particularly on speech perception and speech production. She has also worked on language development and processing among bilingual and plurilingual children and adults, and the neuroscience of language. E-mail: ntyap@upm.edu.my  ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8672-7128