Post on 09-Jan-2023
Using Facebook Group toEncourage Peer and Self-
monitoring in Teaching andLearning Writing Skills
By Phạm Thị Thanh Thùy
Faculty of Foreign Languages- English for Business Department
Introduction and Literature Review
In the process of writing learning, it will be a great
help if students can get feedback from their teachers
frequently (Keh 1990, Ferris 1997). However, it is not
easy to give feedbacks to students in every class. In
the Department of English for Business, academic
writing skills are taught for 4 semesters from
sentence- paragraph to essay writing. After these 4
semesters, English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing
skill is taught. Therefore, it is time consuming for
teachers to give feedbacks to students after each
writing lesson, and it is more difficult for teachers
to give students comments in class during writing
lessons. Therefore, improving peers’ feedbacks and
self-monitoring among learners in writing process needs
to be studied more to improve the effectiveness of
teaching writing skills. Besides, most of students have
a facebook account which they can online and
communicate with their friends. This paper aims at
answering two following questions: (1) Can self-
monitoring and peer-assessment help students learn
writing skills better? (2) Can facebook group be used
as an effective way to encourage self-monitoring and
peer-assessment in a writing class?
Self-monitoring or self- assessment is a process of
formative assessment. Students in this process reflect
on and evaluate the quality of their work and their
learning; judge the degree basing on explicitly stated
goals or criteria; identify strengths and weaknesses in
their work, and students will also revise their work
accordingly (Andrade and Du, 2007, p.160). Boud (1995)
added that self-assessment includes two main elements:
(1) creating standards of expected performance; and (2)
making assessments about the quality of the performance
in relation to these stated standards. According to
Boud, Cohen & Sampson (1999); Rolheiser & Ross 2003;
and Wood (2009), self-assessment and self-review is an
authentic real-world approach to get information about
students’ achievements and contributions, because this
approach fosters students’ capabilities for critical
thinking and self- evaluation. Self-assessment and
self-monitoring also play an important role in setting
up a constructive learning process because Boud and
Falchikov (2006) supported that asking students to
participate into designing assessment process, choosing
suitable criteria and making judgments to work of
themselves and others will be essential for them to
prepare for subsequent working life. Some researchers
study the effects of self-assessment and self-
motivating performance of graduates (Boud, Cohen &
Sampson (1999); Rolheiser & Ross 2003, Wood 2009).
Some researchers also study about peer assessment and
peer review. According to Bostock (2006), and Wood &
Kurzel (2008), peer assessment is a process of giving
and getting “summative” and “non-summative” feedbacks
from their peers (in this scope of study is from their
classmates). As for them, unlike general assessment
process in which the teacher holds all the power and
makes all the choices, which limits the potential for
learner development in all aspects, peer review is a
“non-threatening process” which most of students
prefer, and this beneficial process provides
suggestions from their peers about what is good and
what should be improved as well as how to improve their
work and helps them understand the criteria that will
be used for their summative assessments (Wood & Kurzel
2008). Besides, Bostock (2006), and Wood & Kurzel
(2008) mention that the peer review process may assist
the marking process for teachers in developing the
marking criteria which will then be applied to access
their own work, and others' work also. Furthermore,
Boud, Cohen & Sampson (1999); Rolheiser & Ross 2003,
Wood 2009 also study about effects of asking students
to give feedbacks to their classmates’ and themselves
writing products. As for them, because each student
involves into judgment process of their own and their
classmates’ contribution, which surely will encourage
students to reflect their role and contributions as an
ownership to the process of the group work. As the
result, peer-assessment increase fairness in assessment
process. Peer-monitoring also encourages students’
involvement and responsibility because if they are
irresponsible, other students will disagree with their
assessments, and will not trust their assessments. In
this case, students are encouraged to involve in the
assessment processes by developing higher level
awareness of the task through this extended engagement
with the teacher in the assessment process (Wood &
Kurzel 2008). Therefore, peer monitoring also pushes
group work to success when students are involved in
developing the assessment process. This may include
establishing their own assessment criteria through
consultation with teaching staff. Alternatively you can
provide students with sample of self and/or peer
assessment criteria. More importantly, Broud et al
(1999) think that peer-assessment will help students
strive for a more advanced and better understanding of
the subject matter they are learning, which changes
students’ role from a passive learner to a more active
learner, assessor. In other word, peer-assessment helps
students achieve their learning objects effectively.
Lastly, peer-assessment also reduces lecturers’ marking
time when it is operated successfully.
Background of the Study
As mentioned previously, students in the Department of
Business English, National Economics University are
taught writing skills for four stages. At the first
stage, students are taught how to write different kinds
of sentences through the course book and the
supplementary materials composed by teachers in the
Department. This semester is designed to provide
students with a systematic review of sentence patterns,
and to create students’ awareness about problems when
making sentences and ability to correct them. Secondly,
the second semester provides students with models,
techniques and practice that enable them to carry out a
number of writing tasks in different genres they may
need to accomplish in their ordinary life as well as
business life. Go beyond writing good sentences,
students now will practice writing complete texts:
descriptions of people, places, objects and graphs;
summaries, informal letters, formal letters,
application letters and curriculum vitae. This second
semester is aimed at developing students’ writing
skills on various everyday life and business contexts.
It will raise their awareness of the structure, the
content, the techniques, especially the language used
in each kind of text. It also attempts to build
students’ confidence and experience in expressing their
ideas into a complete text. Next, the third course of
writing teaching is for the second year students. This
part presents students with the writing process, the
structure of a paragraph as well as how to write parts
of a paragraph. After that, it takes students through
different kinds of paragraph including paragraphs that
show examples (illustration); paragraphs that tell
stories (narration); paragraphs that explain how things
happen (process analysis); paragraphs that put things
into groups (classification); paragraphs that tell what
something means (definition); paragraphs that show
similarities and differences (comparison and contrast);
paragraphs that persuade (argument). Learning how to
write a paragraph plays an essential part in writing
task in general and is an important step in writing an
essay. An essay writing course is designed for the
second year students. This is the fourth semester in
the process of learning writing skills. This course
provides students with basic knowledge of essay
organization, unity and coherence, ways to improve
academic writing style. In the next part of the course,
students go through different kinds of essay: process
analysis, cause and effect, classification, comparison
and contrast, argument, and discussion essays. With
various practice tasks, writing in each lesson comes in
its natural process: gathering vocabulary and ideas for
a topic, brainstorming and outlining, writing, and
editing. The course is aimed at equipping students with
fundamental understanding of the essay first, and then
supplying them with practice tasks in writing different
kinds of essay. Moreover, the course also raises
students’ awareness of using the right academic writing
style, encourages them to edit their own writing, and
acquaints them with timed writing. In the scope of this
paper, the writer wants to focus on the 5th stage of the
curriculum in teaching writing skills for business
students: that is teaching English for Academic
Purposes (EAP) writing. The writing course is a
tailored course designed for the third year students.
Its purpose is to develop the students’ understanding
of how the theoretical aspects of conducting a research
and writing a 5000-word-report which can be applied to
a practical project. Business – related topics are
encouraged to help students apply their learnt
knowledge in a business project. As an undergraduate
module, the breadth and depth of business analysis
undertaken is expected to be modest. The aims of this
course are to develop the students’ research skills; to
enable students to develop business ideas to project
proposal and presentation stage; to provide an
opportunity for students to integrate their learning
from other courses in an applied business project; to
enable students to produce the course final product of
a complete business project in a written form. It is
hoped that this paper will improve teaching
effectiveness and reduce workload for teacher in giving
students’ feedbacks to their work.
Subjects of the Study:Subjects of the study are third-year students who are
at upper-intermediate English level and were already
learned 4 semesters about academic writing skills. Two
classes are taught at the same time in a classroom
equipped with computers accessing to the internet.
Class 1 consists of 26 students with 24 females and 2
males. Class 2 consists of 25 students with 24 females
and 1 male.
MethodThere are two classes run at the same time. Class 1
(Controlled Group) is taught in a normal way without
applying self-assessment and peer-assessment. In this
controlled group, the teacher gives general guides to
students’ work and then students base on the teacher’s
theory in the classroom and general guides, adjust
their work and conduct their research. Class 2
(Experimental Group) is used self-assessment and peer-
assessment process while teaching. The success of peer
assessment process is decided mostly through a
predetermined list of criteria from which students
individually assess each other's contribution.
Therefore, class 2 (EG) is conducted in the following
stages.
1.Stage 1: At the beginning of the course, the teacher
trains students how to give comments to other’s work
by clarifying rules (see appendix 1) for students and
providing students suggested questions or clear
criteria to assess other students’ work. All
suggested questions, criteria and rules are posted in
facebook group after theory session is provided. To
avoid confusion among students, besides providing
clear information to students, the teacher also
analyzes a paper written by some students previously
in the class so that students can understand clearly
what they are going to write; how they have to
comment other students’ work, and avoid
misunderstanding (see appendix 2).
The analyses with “track changes” and comments of the
teacher are also posted in the facebook group, so
students can open and see them again whenever they
want to consult.
2.Stage 2: In the classroom, theory about how to
conduct a research is provided by the teacher such as
how to make a research proposal; how to write a
research question; how to interview; how to design a
questionnaire; how to conduct a survey…. After each
class which only focuses on one research aspect, the
teacher gives students specific tasks to prepare for
their own research such as making a proposal;
designing a survey, questionnaire; writing a report
about their research (see appendix 3). As Cresswell
(2000:236) suggested, those who involve in self and
peer-assessment should focus on language problems at
the expense of crucial attention to global concerns
such as logicality, relevance of ideas, structure,
appropriateness of contents. Students are also
encouraged to provide suggested revision for the
other students’ work.
Students are asked to post their own work on the
facebook group before the deadline. After that
deadline, other students are asked to give comments
on their classmates’ posted work. A list of suggested
questions is posted on the facebook group, so that
students can base on these questions when giving
comments to other students’ work.
Students are assigned to give a written comment to a
certain person whom they will read that research from
the beginning, and each student has to give one more
unofficial comment to other student’s work. The
unofficial comments are not limited.
All work and comments of students are read by the
teacher, and the teacher only gives comments whenever
there is no agreement or controversial issues occurring
among students.
Near the end of the course- at week 14, a questionnaire
investigating the students’ attitudes towards self-
monitoring and peer-assessment is conducted in EG
(class 2), and interviews are employed with five EG
students. All questionnaire and interviews are in
English.
Data Analysis
I/ Analysis from comments and responses on facebook group
All students’ comments on the facebook group made by
themselves and by their class-mates in EG (class 2)
were tallied and arranged into 4 categories: comments
on content which relating firmly on each student’s
research title; comments on organization which
reflecting in each student’s research proposal and
report; comments on forms such as grammatical
structures, argumentation patterns; comments on writing
techniques such as if points are arranged parallel, if
nominal patterns are used often, if words are used
correctly. As mentioned in the method section, each
student has to give an officially written comment on
ONE class-mate’s writing work and give one or two more
comments (no limit) on other students’ writings. After
receiving comments from classmates, students will give
feedback either agreeing with the comments or
disagreeing with the class-mate’s comments.
Table 1 shows the number of students giving comments on
other student’s research title.
Number of
students
Percentage in the
total made by
studentsPeer-
assessme
nt
Self-
correcti
on
Peer-
assessme
nt
Self-
correcti
onComments on
content (is the
title business-
based; can the
title developed,
is the subject
50 50 33.5% 66.5%
clarified in the
title)Comments on forms
(does the title
follow the
accurate form, is
the title
meaningful)
25 50 33.5% 66.5%
Comments on
writing
techniques (is
there any mistake
in word choice,
is there any
spelling/ grammar
mistakes, does
he/she use
various kinds of
sentence
structure)
75 50 60% 40%
Table 1: Frequency of students giving comments on research title.
Because that was the first time giving comment;
therefore, students are not familiar with this
activity, they only gave an official written comment
and one more comment as required. After getting peer-
correction from their friends, students adjust, self-
correct their writing and post their writing again.
Among comments of students, most of students gave
comments on spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes of
their class-mates’ title. Some students gave comments
on how to change the word, what noun phrase should be
replaced. The following are some comments of students
in EG.
- I think that it is an interesting topic, but requiring a great investment
in time, effort to research because the scope of the research is large.
You should narrow and specify the scope in proposal (ex: Hanoi)
- “I think the title is too broad, where are you going to conduct your
research?”
- “The time of your research is not specified here”.
- “The title should be narrowed. Who are the subjects of your
research?”
- “Can you conduct your research with all students? I think you should
narrow to NEU students [NEU stands for National Economics
University]
- “This content is not business at all. Can you change something like
“customer behavior” and consider students as customers”
- “Please specify your research subject”.
- “Your title is good. I like this issue [safety of helmets] and I think it will
be developed well”.
Students also improve their writing through responding
to feedbacks from other students. Facebook is clearly a
forum for students to speak out their thought and
ideas. The following are some examples of their
responses.
- Topic: A study on Some Causes of Intensive High Price of Imported
Baby Formulas for Housewife Customers in Some Big Retail Stores in
Hanoi.
Plus, I didn't get your point as you said our group should have given
"a specific number of causes like 3, 4 or 5 as there are many factors
contribute to the high prices of imported baby formulas. The purpose
of the research is to study on the causes and we are not sure how
many causes it can be. So if the topic mentions a specific number like
3, 4, 5..., some important causes might be abandoned.
- “You should specify a specific product in your research” Response:
we don't want to be specific about any product because we want to
study the buying decision as a whole. Actually, we study the process
of buying decision. And that includes 5 steps: Problem Recognition,
Information Search, Evaluation of Alternatives, Purchase, Post
Purchase. We want to study how male and female do those steps, so
we don't think we need a specific goods. Is that acceptable?
Table 2 below provides the number of students giving
comments on their classmates’ research proposals.
During the lesson, the teacher gives theory about how
to write a proposal from two ways, students are also
provided elements of a proposal, suggested questions
when giving comments (see appendix 3). Besides, the
teacher also analyzes a proposal for the whole class
with “track changes” tool and posts that analyzed
proposal on the facebook group. Then students are asked
to make their own proposal and post on the facebook
group so that the other students can give comment.
Number of
students
Percentage in the
total made by
studentsPeer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
nt
Peer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
ntComments on 50 75 40% 60%
content (is the
proposal
informative;
enough supports
to the points)Comments on
organization (is
the information
well organized,
is information
logical…)
75 50 60% 40%
Comments on forms
(is there any
grammar mistakes,
are sentence
constructed well)
75 50 60% 40%
Comments on
writing
techniques (e.g.
parallelism;
nominal; word
choice)
100 125 44.5% 55.5%
Table 2: Frequency of students giving comments on research
proposals
Because that was the second time students gave comments
on their class-mates’ work, they provided more official
comments and also gave non-official comments on other
works of their friends. Besides, some students also
gave very good suggestions for students to change the
points. After getting the comments, other students
replied to show their opinion to agree or disagree with
their classmate’s comments. The dialogues between
comment receiver and comment giver were meaningful to
two.
Here are some examples of comments students gave to
their class-mates’ work.
- I think in outline part 2a.The real situation of English class at NEU
should be re-organized like this:
-The class size of BE students: reality, pros and cons.
-The class size of student of other faculty: cause and effect.
-The comparison between two kinds of class.
Why don’t you compare class-size of BE students with class-size of
students in other faculties with the same criteria like reality, pros and
cons... to find out similarities and differences?
- The outline should be re-organized, reading this I don’t know which
point is the main and which point is the supporting point.
- As for us, this information should be moved to II.2.
Table 3 provides the number of students giving
comments on other questionnaire.
Number of
students
Percentage in the
total made by
studentsPeer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
nt
Peer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
ntComments on
content (are
questions
relevant to the
outline;
75 75 50% 50%
Comments on
organization (are
questions
organized
logically, is the
format of the
50 50 50% 50%
questionnaire
suitable with the
outline)Comments on
writing
techniques (Is
there any
question
misunderstood and
have problems
like double
negative
questions,
leading
questions,
controversial
questions)
100 75 57% 43%
Table 3: Frequency of students giving comments on class-mates’
research questionnaire
That was the third time students had to give comments
on their classmates’ work; therefore, students became
familiar with giving, receiving comments and adjusting
their writing after getting comments from others.
Gradually, giving and getting comments become their
daily work. The number of comments increased
significantly. Besides giving comments on the relevance
of questions to the research proposal and outline, as
well as on the order of questions, students also gave
comments on writing techniques of their classmates such
as if the questions face to any problems like double
negative questions, leading questions or controversial
questions. The following are some comments from
students in the EAP writing class 53.
- I don’t see a specific level of your subject. This is because each level
will be taught differently in their classroom. For example, first and
second year students will have more group works than third and
fourth year students. Question 3 has too big gap between 20-40 in
your choice. Question 7 should add choices “nothing” and “others” so
people can add some more words. Question 10 should ask about
how to improve quality of English classes, because if you ask about
how to reduce student number, there is only a way to reduce:
separate or divide students into small class. This is nonsense when
asking like that.
- I don’t understand question 1, 2 in page 2. They seem not to connect
to your research. I think you should combine question 2 with 3 (page
2) and should ask like “Have you ever forgotten to do homework
because you are fond of surfing the web? If Yes, how often?”.
Question 1 page 2 should be changed into “How do think about the
effectiveness of Internet on your academic result” so it can more
likely match to the topic.
- I think your questionnaires are more likely suitable with young
people than with general citizens. Your 2nd version to ask foreigners
should be shortened down and finding foreigners to answer your
questions is not difficult because they are subjects to be invited with
insistence. However the thing is if they will answer your questions
frankly, so you should change to ask them indirectly. I totally
disagree with you if you are going to use these questions for shop
assistances/ sellers who directly invite with insistence foreigners.
Sellers will surely not answer your questions frankly.
After two weeks for comments and responses to
questionnaires, students adjust their questionnaires
and deliver their questionnaires to subjects of their
research. After that, students start writing a report
of their research. The role of the teacher in this
stage is observing students’ comments and asking
students to give comments again if their comments are
too simple or irrelevant to the given rules. The
teacher no longer gives any comments on such issues as
spelling, structure, contents of the students’ report.
At this stage, responsibility to give comments is
passed to the students’ classmates and the students
themselves. Previously, in stage 2, the teacher posted
some cases in which comments were too simple, and asked
students to re-write their comments; therefore, the
students were raised responsibility in giving comments
to others.
Writing a report is the last stage of this course. The
report will be marked and that is the students’ final
mark. At this stage, after many times writing their own
work, their self-assessments and comments to their
classmates’ work, students are familiar with how to
give comments. Besides, criteria provided by the
teacher (See appendix 3, session 4 for more information) about how
to give comments on this stage are good guides for
students at this stage. Once again, such criteria as
format, content, language, analysis are analyzed
seriously through students’ comments. These criteria
are also good guides for students to write their own
report specifically. Besides, rubrics with marks
(appendix 3) which are posted on facebook group will
orient students to mark other reports and write their
own report better.
Table 4 illustrates the number of students giving
comments on other research report.
Number of
students
Percentage in the
total made by
studentsPeer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
nt
Peer-
assessme
nt
Self-
assessme
ntFormat layout (if
the font,
spacing, margins
follow the
instruction; if
all parts in the
outline are
included in the
report).
25 50 33% 67%
Language: (if the
grammar,
50 25 67% 33%
punctuation are
accurate; if the
register is
appropriate to
academic style
and are they
reader-friendly;
if the discourse
clarifies the
argument; if
there are
cohesions within
and between
paragraphs)
Content: (if the
theoretical
framework is
clear and
relevant; if
there is clear
relationship
between the
100 50 67% 33%
research
questions and the
literature
survey; if the
contents are
illustrated
clearly and
persuasive with
supports of
charts)Table 4: Frequency of students giving comments on research report
As mentioned previously, at this stage, the teacher no
longer gives any comments for students on their
writing; her task is to make sure all students have to
write at least one comment to a class member and one
self-assessment. The students themselves and their
classmates will take this responsibility. For peer-
assessments, most of students give comments on
language, especially word choices and writing style
(67%). Some students frankly suggest specific words or
phrases replacing some words in their peers’ writing,
which makes their writing more formal and improves
students’ writing quality clearly. On the one hand,
because each student is assigned to follow a specific
classmate’s writing, he/she remembers content as well
as format of their peer’s compositions very well, which
assists much the comment process. On the other hand,
because the research organization and outline of the
research have been assessed and self-monitored in stage
1, 2, and 3, not much of students’ writing contents and
organization is changed at this time, most of things
which are changed are language usages, word choices,
writing style. Furthermore, because students are asked
to use “track changes” tool of micro soft word program,
peers’ comments are specific and clear. Comments are
also posted on facebook groups; therefore, other
students can learn from other students when reading
their compositions and comments.
II/ Analysis from questionnaire and survey.
One week before the course is over (week 14), students
were asked to answer a survey questionnaire including
10 questions relating to benefits of using facebook
group in giving written self-assessment and peer
comments (see appendix for detail questionnaire).
Most of questions in the questionnaire ask about the
frequency of students in giving comments to other
classmates and their self-monitoring when studying the
course; types of comments they often focus on; benefits
they get when giving comments; their reaction when
receiving comments from their peers.
According to the survey result, among 100% of students
having facebook account, nearly 70% of them use
facebook more than twice a day, and 56.5% check
facebook EAP group everyday. Among those who often
check facebook EAP group, besides reading the teacher’
notes, 83.3% of students read their classmates’
comments. This means, facebook is a good forum for
students to communicate academically with their
classmates.
Chart 1: Students’ activities when checking facebook
EAP group account.
Furthermore, when getting comments either from their
peers or from the teacher, nearly 75% of students
adjust their compositions right away especially basing
on these comments. For their peers’ comments, students
will discuss further to reach understanding and then
only adjust their writing after both of comment
receiver and comment giver agree with each other. This
shows that through using peer comments through facebook
group, students will communicate academically more
often and faster to get a better composition.
Improving peer-assessment through facebook account also
improves quality of students’ research report. The
final writing reports of the two groups were graded by
two experienced teachers, who based on the criteria on
5 aspects given to students on the facebook group:
content, format layout/ organization; language
(grammar, vocabulary); analysis; mechanics, which
respectively accounted for 50%, 10%, 20%, 15%, 5% of
the total score. There was no big difference between
the scores of the two teachers. The comparison between
the compositions of Experimental group (EG) and
compositions of controlled group (CG) shows that EG has
higher qualified compositions.
The results from the independent samples of T-test of
the final report scores between the EG and CG in table
5 showed no significant difference in the total score,
but there are some difference in five aspects of
writing. The self-monitoring and cross-check process
improves the quality of students’ compositions in EG
especially in their language usage and analyzing ways
in their writing (P = 0.000; 0.001)
Mean SD t PTotal score EG 69.14 9.02 1.12 .157
CG 65.18 7.98Score on Format
layout
(organization)
EG 33.39 4.18 1.05 0.198
CG 29.98 3.34Score on Language
(grammar,
vocabulary)
EG 6.98 1.02 4.06 .001
CG 5.47 1.05Score on Content EG 10.21 1.02 -.29 .568
CG 9.87 1.22Score on Analysis EG 6.72 1.01 4.12 .000
CG 5.95 1.04Score on mechanics EG 3.03 1.06 2.00 .232
CG 3.27 1.12
Table 5: Independent-sample T-test of final report
between the two group
The test results of the two groups also relevant to
what students gave in the survey. According to some
students interviewed, when writing comments to their
classmates, they have to consult carefully the taught
theory, and given criteria of teacher and think
carefully before posting their official comments, which
helps them a lot in writing their own composition. Most
of students answering the survey and being interviewed
agree that peer assessment and self-monitoring are
helpful in revising their drafts and improving their
writing proficiency. In term of self-monitoring,
students’ self-assessments provide the teacher
feedbacks of students’ compositions and enable the
teacher and students to reach agreements and find
solution for students’ problems more easily. Besides,
before writing self-assessment, the students have to
look back at their writing more closely, critically and
analytically, which encourages them to test them out
through their annotations, and they will be more
receptive to the teacher’s and classmates’ feedbacks.
Referring to peer-assessments, because each student has
to follow the whole writing process of one specific
classmate, the feedbacks provided are more specific and
relevant to students. Moreover, peer-assessment can
also help reduce the ‘free rider’ problem as students
are aware that their compositions will be graded by
both their teacher and their peers.
Another significant point shown in the survey that
different students use this writing technique with
different focuses.
Chart 2: Types of comments students focuses on
As shown in chart 2, the percentage of the comments on
content makes up the lowest level (87% of students
ranked this criteria at the least important level,
which makes its ranking average is 1.17). To make this
point clear, most of students in the interview showed
that before writing their composition, they had already
though about contents which were specified in the
proposal, and had already discussed the appropriateness
of the contents in the proposal; therefore, in the
report writing stage, they and their friends rarely
spent time on commenting on contents any more. Writing
techniques are the most significant thing (56.5%) which
students benefit from their peer-feedbacks. The survey
results reflect the reality of the EAP class. As can be
seen from table 5 above, compared with the CG, the EG
had made a significantly bigger improvement in nominal
phrases, word choices, parallel structures (p=.001).
The second benefit is on forms, grammatical structures.
Answering the interview, all students said that when
receiving the suggestions from their teacher and
classmates, students actively put forward their
opinions on the feedback, which certainly improves
their knowledge and quality of their composition much.
Besides that, using facebook group also helps students
have quick conversations directly with their teacher
and their classmates; therefore, misunderstanding will
easily be removed. It is clear to conclude that the
more students write, the better their comments, the
more comments they give, and the better their writing
also is.
Table 6 shows the differences between the two groups in
mistakes made in specific parts. All the criteria were
clarified in appendix 3 (session 4: report).
Mistakes made
by students
Group Mean SD t p
Mistakes on
Format layout
(organization)
EG 29.98 3.34 1.05 0.015
CG 33.39 4.18Mistakes on
Language
(grammar,
vocabulary) and
writing
mechanics
EG 5.47 1.05 4.06 0.000
*
CG 6.98 1.02
Mistakes on
Content
EG 10.21 1.02 -0.29 0.598
CG 9.87 1.22Mistakes on
Analysis
EG 6.72 1.01 4.12 0.612
CG 5.95 1.04Mistakes on
Conclusion
EG 3.03 1.06 2.00 0.478
CG 3.27 1.12*significant at 0.00 level.
Table 6: Differences in mistakes made in research report
After transforming the data based on the results from
t-tests to neutralize the extraneous differences, an
independent sample t-test was conducted to see whether
there was a statistically significant difference in
mistakes making between the experimental and control
groups in writing their final research reports. An
alpha level of 0.05 was established before testing the
significance. As recommended by Pallant (2007), the
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances was checked. If
the Levene's Test is significant (p. < .05), the two
variances are significantly different. If it is not
significant (p. >.05), the two variances are
approximately equal. Here, since the Levene's test is
significant (p. = 0.001 < .05), it can be assumed that
the variances are not equal. Therefore, the assumption
of equal variance has not been met. Next, the results
of the t-test were checked. If the variances are
approximately equal, the top line is read. If the
variances are not equal, the bottom line of the t-test
table, which refers to equal variances not assumed, is
read. Based on the results of the Levene's test, it was
known that the two groups had not equal variances, so
the bottom line was read.
As indicated in Table 6, there is a significant
difference between the mistakes made by the
experimental group (M = 5.47, SD = 1.05) and the
mistakes made by the control group (M = 6.98, SD =
1.02; t (4.06) = 12, p<0.000). This result suggests
that the experimental group who frequently had self-
assessment and received comments from their peers made
fewer mistakes than the control group in using grammar,
vocabulary, as well as writing techniques when writing
their final report. Another difference between the two
groups is the difference in organization of the report.
The experimental group made fewer mistakes in
structuring their report (M = 29.98, SD = 3.34) than
the control group (M = 33.39, SD = 4.18; t (1.05),
p<0.015).
Group N Mean Std Dev df t Sig.
Experime
ntal
Control
26
25
9.35
5.36
1.34
0.70
27.07 12.00 .000*
*Sig. p < .05
Table 7: The t-test for the experimental and control groups
The results of the independent samples t-test analysis from
the final research reports indicated that having self-
assessments and applying peer-suggestions serve as useful
tools for language teachers in EAP writing class in
facilitating learners’ writing competence. In this study,
self-assessment and peer-correction in this study have been
found to boost students’ ability in using their language,
varying their structures and sharpening their conclusion
much better through the exchange of information between them
and their classmates to enhance their knowledge of the
subject and ability to express their ideas (sig.
p=0.00<0.05).
ConclusionTo sum up, the data, observations and mistake details in
students’ final research reports help the researcher confirm
the fact that teachers can benefit from self-assessments and
peer-suggestions in boosting students’ writing ability and
communication skills among their classmates. Although at the
first sight, the researcher assumed that using facebook
group tool will decrease the teacher’s workload, in fact,
additional briefing time and time spent on reading, giving
students’ comments increase the lecturer’s workload. Besides
reading students’ proposals, writing work, the lecturer also
has to read students’ assessments on their peers, read
students’ own self-corrections, reduce the risk with respect to reliability of grades as peer pressure to apply
elevated grades or friendships may influence the assessment,
and may discriminate against others if students ‘gang up’
against any one in students’ class. All these tasks demand
the lecturer’s time. However, this new method will increase
students’ responsibilities and autonomy in giving comments
to their classmates. Though some students may feel reluctant
to make judgments regarding their peers, it is obvious that
the more students write comments, the better their writing
will be improved.
REFERENCES
Bostock, S. (2006). Student peer assessment. [viewed 7
Jun 2012; verified 8 Jan
2012].
http://www.keele.org.uk/docs/bostock_peer_assessment.ht
m
Andrade, H. & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to
criteria - referenced self –
Assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 32 (2), 159 - 181
Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing Learning Through Self-
assessment. London: Kogan
Page.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning
and assessment. Asessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,
24(4), 413-426.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240405
Boud, D & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment
with long-term learning.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31
(4), 399-423
Cresswell, A. (2000). Self-monitoring in student
writing: developing learner
responsibility. ELT Journal, 54/3, 235-44.
Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: a step-be-step guide to data
analysis
using SPSS for Windows (v.15). Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Rolheiser, C. & Ross, J. A. (2003). Student self-evaluation:
What research says
and what practice says. http://www.cdl.org/resource-
library/articles/self_eval.php
Wood, D. (2009). A scaffolded approach to developing
students' skills and
confidence to participate in self and peer
assessment. In ATN Assessment
Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions. Melbourne:
Australian Technology Network. Retrieved from
http://emedia.rmit.edu.au/conferences/index.php/ATNAC/A
TNAC09/paper/view/203/5
Wood, D. & Kurzel, F. (2008). Engaging students in
reflective practice through a
process of formative peer review and peer
assessment. In ATN Assessment
Conference 2008: Engaging students in assessment. Adelaide.
Retrieved from
http://www.ojs.unisa.edu.au/index.php/atna/article/down
load/376/252
Appendix 1
Rules for Online Facebook Discussions
Dear EAP Writing-ers,
The following are some rules when posting your comments
and responses to the facebook group.
1.Name the file/ comments clearly. For example Nguyen
Van A- proposal (version 1)
2.Be on time! 30% of the point on that session will
be subtracted after the deadline.
3.After AT MOST 2 days of posting compositions, those
who are assigned to give comments to must post
their written comments on the facebook group.
4.Comments must be posted on time. 30% of the point
on that session will be subtracted after the
deadline.
5.Each person has to give ONE official and written
assessment to one classmate, AND comment other
unlimited classmates. All comments must be posted
on the facebook group of the class. For example,
student Nguyen Van A gives one written assessment
to the composition of student Nguyen Van B, and
gives some comments to other classmates.
6. This facebook group is for academic purposes.
Impolite and inappropriate comments will be
punished. Responses and replies MUST relate to
discussing issues. Comments and assessments should
be constructive. It is forbidden to use this
facebook group to criticize, revenge of somebody.
7.Mistakes should be avoided in the comments and
assessments.
8.Use references and quote/ cite to increase
persuasiveness.
9.Some links connecting to the discussing issues can
be shared in the facebook group.
10. Those who have persuasive and great comments
will get bonus for their comments.
11. All comments and suggestions/ assessments must
be responded by the owner.
12. Adjusted writing must be re-posted on the
facebook group.
13. The teacher will answer questions on the
facebook group and only gives comments/ suggestions
to debating or inconclusive points.
APPENDIX 2: An example of a proposal with suggestions to improve (with “track changes”: the red color is comment; the green is the writer’s correction).
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
I. Title: Effects of facebook on the business of students in Hanoi (spelling)
II. Statement of the problems/ Background:1. Facebook (FB):
a. Definition and historyb. Popularity
2. Students in Hanoi: (they come from different areas of VN or even other countries, but they now live and study at universities in Hanoi) should narrow down the subjects. How
do you know they are from Hanoi? Should have other way to limit (e.g. age, sex)- 2nd year NEU students/ students of Business Schools/ Young students are good examples.a. The concern about businessb. The use of FBc. The use of FB for business
III.Theoretical framework:1. Many reasearch have been conducted with the topic related to
how fb affects to business, the effects of social networking on business, as well as the advantages and the disadvantages of fb in general…
(Sorce: articles on the internet)
2. The topic of our group’s research is rather different. When study, we not only point out the two-side feature of fb to the business, but also focus on showing how students in Hanoican realize that in order to actively and actually join in economics field . The main benificiary of our research is students in Hanoi who have a special concern about business so that we care much about their thoughts and opinions as well as concerntrate on analyizing all things according to their demands and expectations
IV. Purpose: 1. General purpose: Evaluate effects of FB on the business of
students in Hanoi, then discover if students in Hanoi should use FB for business or not.
2. Reasearch questions:- What are the advantages of using FB for students in Hanoi todo business ?
- Are there any negative effects? If yes, what are they?
V. Hypotheses:1. Hypothesis 1: FB brings about a lot of benefits to Hanoi
students who want to do business onlinea. It provides an open environment to get in touch with
prospective customersb. It is a low cost marketing channelc. It is convenient and easy to use
2. Hypothesis 2: FB hardly causes any negative effects on Hanoi students’ business
VI. Methods: good1. Qualitative Method:
Analize books, newspapers,… related to the topic Collect information in the internet, websites Aim: - to have a thorough sense of social network in general and facebook in particular (take a deep concern in its popularity)
- to clarify the connections between facebook and business
- find more evidences to affirm that facebook strongly involves the feasibilty and the effectiveness of the business, especially students’
2. Quantitative Method: (Give some purposes of these activities-i.e. why do you conduct that method)
Carry out a survey in which 100 students in 3 big universities in Hanoi will be chosen randomly to perform a questionaire
Aim:- to have a general view of the level in which students inHanoi show their interest in business
- to check the information about : the time they spent to check fb, their frequency of using fb, what they did whilebeing online, if they ever do business or think of doing business through fb, if they ever order products through fb,… (if yes, suggest them to write down their experience on the hand-out paper)
Observe the habit of using facebook of classmates Aim: to reinforce the consideration about the
popularity of fb to the youth Interview some Hanoi students who used facebook to do
business (run shops/restaurants) and achieved great success (if possible)
Aim:- to know how important the fb’s role plays in the development of their business and their opinions about theeffects of fb on business
- to improve the persuasiveness of the reasearch
VII.Structure of report:1. Abstract
a. Purposeb. Brief introduce about methodc. Summary findingd. Implicationse. Keywordsf. Paper type
2. Introduction:- General introduction - Background- Hypotheses- Research methods
3. Findings: Must give details with main ideas and supporting details:
I. FB’s positive effects:(according to points of view of researchers on the internet & interviewers)
1. About customers- các em phải khái quatscácgive some general main points ở đâyhere. Ví dụ Benefits for customers: (1) information; (2) networking…don’t say MEET NEW…; IMPROVE… here
- FB help meet new customers & gather customers’ information
- FB help improve customer relationship
2. About prices for advertising3. About the convenience in use
II. FB’s negative effects:(find out after interviewing)
4. Conclusion: a. Conclusion b. Recommendation for future research
5. Appendix and referencea. Questionnaire
b. BibliographyVIII. Work Plan: who in charge? Time Tasks Details & Person in charge
Week 3 - 6 Find & collectinformation
- Study basic information about facebook (Tien)
- Prepare for the survey and the interview (3 members)
Week 7 - 8 Send the questionnaire & Interview
- Survey
NEU : Tien & Quynh
HNU : Quynh & Trang
FTU : Tien & Trang
- Interview (3 members)
Week 9 -10 Analyze the result
- Sumarize the result (3 members)
- Make a draft of the report (Tien)
- Ouline the first version of thepresentation slide (Trang)
Week 10 - 12
Write the complete report and make a presentation slide
- Introduction (Tien)
- Finding
+ Part I (Tien & Quynh)
+ Part II (Trang)
- Conclusion (Trang)
- Others: Quynh
APPENDIX 3
ASSESSMENT SUGGESTIONS
I/ Session 1: Title
1. Is the title clear?
2. Is the title narrow enough to be developed in a short research?
3. Is the title a business-based title?
4. Are subjects of the study clarified in the title?
5. Is there anything the title should be changed?
II/ Session 2: Proposal
1. Are all points covered in the proposal?
• Title: Narrowed title• Statement of the problem: clear; concise; from
general to detail• Theoretical framework: basic theory to base on • Rationale: tasks to be completed; simple terms• Source and research method: Using indirect speech;
detail methods; which source will be collected and how.
• Preliminary outline: well-organized ideas; ranked; supports main ideas
• Work plan: Schedule for complete the research
2. Is content in each part informative enough to support the study?
3. Is there any information needed adding? Give specific suggestion.
3. Does the writer follow quotation and paraphrasing techniques to avoid violating plagiarism?
III/ Session 3: Survey Questionnaire
1. Are questions relevant to the outline in the proposal?
2. Are questions arranged logically, clear?
3. Is the format of the questionnaire suitable with theoutline?
4. Is there any question misunderstood and have problems like double negative questions, leading questions, controversial questions?
VI/ Session 4: Report
Criteria Description Comments
Good points Things shouldbe improved
Format Layout
Professional appearance (neatness; spacing; fonts;margins MUST follow the instruction
Structure: Include all relevant parts in a proposal.
Language Accuracy (grammar; punctuation; etc.)
Register: appropriate academic style;reader-friendliness
Discourse: Clarity of argument; cohesion within
and between paragraphs
Content: Theoretical framework(or Review ofLiterature)
Clear and relevant theory(placing the research topic within the development of the field)
Clear relationship between the research questions and the literature survey
Legislative paraphrase
Analysis Research questions and objectives
Relevant procedures: data
collection, data analysis and interpretation;clearly and systematically presented with convincing arguments/justification
Clear information about the practical place
Relevant analysis about problems/ issues in the practical place
Conclusion
Good summary ofmentioned points; ; well-supported, convincingly related to the study as a
whole, draws clear and relevant recommendations/ practical implications from the study (where appropriate)
2. Basing on the following marking criteria, can you suggest a mark for the written report?
Mark Marking criteria
10 An outstanding report. Sharp, incisive argument, polished and fluent writing. Perfect, but nearly as good as can be expected. Follow well the principles, all deadlines of the teacher.
9 Excellent report on an intellectually demanding topic. Polished and fluent writing. Aims and objectives are clearly formulated andaddressed. Research located within extensive background reading of appropriate academic
literature.
Very high quality analysis, expertly presentedin an appropriate manner.
Methods and analysis are insightful and rigorous. Outcomes are expertly evaluated.
Conclusions clearly supported by the results.
Follow well the principles, all deadlines of the teacher
8 Excellent piece of focused work. Very well argued and presented.
Aims and objectives are well formulated and addressed. Research located within considerable background reading of relevant academic literature.
Methods and analysis are comprehensive and well executed.
Outcomes are valuable.
Very well written and presented. Aims and objectives are clearly formulated and addressed.
Conclusions well supported by the results
Follow well the principles, but sometimes misssome deadlines given by the teacher
7 Very good report. Aims and objectives are
clearly formulated and addressed. Topic is suitable and located in the context of existing academic literature although the depth and breadth of reading may be variable.
Research located within an appropriate conceptual landscape. Extensive data presentedin an appropriate manner. Methodology is largely sound although unlikely to be innovative.
Comes to sound and coherently argued conclusions.
Lacks the overall consistency, polish and fluency of a higher scoring report. Structure may be slightly unbalanced; there may be inconsistencies or shortcomings in presentation
Follow well the principles, but sometimes misssome deadlines given by the teacher.
6 Adequate piece of research. Evidence of good effort and sound outcomes but lack imaginationand critical insight.
Topic is not very original and may have poorly-defined objectives that are only partially addressed.
Data are adequate but unlikely to be used to full effect. Satisfactory methodology,
although some minor design may be present. Data presented well but analysis tends to be descriptive.
Conclusions may lack focus. Structure may be unbalanced.
Writing style and presentation adequate
Follow well the principles, but always miss deadlines given by the teacher.
5 Adequate piece of research.
Evidence of student initiative and effort at some stages.
Unoriginal topic with vague objectives only partially addressed.
Limited background reading of appropriate theoretical background.
Insufficient data in some areas.
Methodology includes some design. Data described rather than critically analysed.
Conclusions lack focus but some attempt is made
Structure, presentation and writing style are adequate
Follow well the principles, but always miss
deadlines given by the teacher.
1-4 Poor report, barely passable in several aspects.
Uninspiring topic and poorly defined objectives with insufficient background reading.
Strengths lie in perseverance and effort but data quality and superficial data analysis prevents adequate addressing of the objectives. Issues seen in isolation, no attempt to relate them to a broader conceptualframework.
Student initiative is lacking at several stages of the research process. Writing and presentation are barely adequate, e.g., poor grammar, unstructured paragraphs, spelling/typing errors, low quality illustration, repetitive.
Never follow well the principles, and always miss deadlines given by the teacher.
APPENDIX 4- Survey Questionnaire