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