USING PEER-GROUP ACTIVITIES TO DEVELOP WRITING SKILLS

USING PEER-GROUP ACTIVITIES TO DEVELOP WRITING SKILLS Yasuko Okada Independent Researcher birdrock@u01.gate01.com Abstract Process writing is a pedagogy that is widely used to teach writing in a foreign language. Through process pedagogies, learners in the foreign language classroom can gain many benefits, including positive social interaction. While these social interactions such as peer feedback can help learners revise and improve their writing in the drafting stages, some Japanese learners of English do not necessarily take advantage of using this writing instruction, because of their lack of confidence in their ability to critique peer s writing (Dyer & Friederich, 2002). Some also avoid giving feedback to learners whose English skills are more advanced than theirs (Armstrong, 2004). In order to successfully implement the process-centered approaches to writing instruction, it is important to develop group activities that learners can actively participate in, which will enhance each learner s writing skills within the group. In this paper I will demonstrate activities that can develop learners writing skills by working with peers. This paper will show that learners can help one another develop their writing proficiency in peer-group work. I will also elaborate on the learners voices, illustrating how these activities shed light on the learners writing. 1 Introduction Process writing is a pedagogical technique that is widely used to teach writing skills in a foreign language classroom; the focus of process-centered approaches to writing instruction has been the act of writing, not the writing product itself. The processes of writing include brainstorming, drafting, getting feedback, and rewriting. Learners experience these stages recursively. In order for learners to develop writing skills through these stages, teachers occasionally use groups or pair work, from which students can benefit when there is positive social interaction. When students are learning a foreign language together, learners share their strengths and weaknesses with others. Peer interaction results in effective learning, as learners complete a task that they may not be able to do individually but may be able to do with assistance. Peer feedback is a particularly beneficial writing process. This type of feedback allows learners to look at their writing from a different perspective and improve it in the rewriting stage. Some studies have shown that while learners can take advantage of peer feedback, some Japanese learners of English have difficulty giving feedback to other learners; they may want to avoid giving feedback and may lack confidence in their English abilities (Armstrong, 2004; Dyer & Friedrich, 2002). 662

Processes and Process-Orientation in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning To teach writing through a process-oriented approach to writing instruction, it is important to develop group activities that learners can actively participate in. These activities will enhance each learner s writing skills within the group. This paper will demonstrate activities that can develop learners writing skills by working with peers. First, I will review previous studies on process writing and peer feedback on writing. After illustrating peer group activities and tasks used by learners, I will finally elaborate on evaluations of learners by showing how these activities shed light on the writing. 2 Background and Theoretical Framework 2.1 Teaching Writing through Process-Oriented Approaches This study draws upon approaches of process-oriented writing in the language classroom, which focuses on the writing process, namely, the act of composing. To refer to the process-oriented approaches to writing instruction, I will use the term process writing in this paper. According to Furneaux (1998), process writing is defined as follows: [A] shift in emphasis in teaching writing from the product of writing activities (the finished text) to ways in which text can be developed: from concern with questions such as What have you written? and What grade is it worth? to How will you write it? and How can it be improved? (p. 257) Process approaches focus on how learners will develop and improve their writing as they grow to recognize what they really want to write. Learners may go through a variety of stages in the composing process: pre-writing, drafting, feedback, and rewriting. In the pre-writing stage, learners prepare what and how they will write as they generate ideas, brainstorm and read examples of similar work. Next, in the drafting stage, learners produce drafts, making a shift from writer-oriented to audience-based text. In the feedback stage, which focuses on content or language, or both, feedback is provided by peers or teacher. Finally, at the rewriting stage, the drafts are revised based on feedback received; the drafts are developed further in terms of content and language. These stages seem to appear in the writing process progressively, but learners experience them recursively to develop a piece of writing in the composing process (Flower & Hayes, 1981; Murray, 1987; Hillocks, 1989). As mentioned earlier, process writing is an effective pedagogy to teach writing skills. However, it is also important to point out that foreign language learners knowledge of language and rhetorical organization may be limited, compared to native language learners (Furneaux, 1998, p. 259), making it difficult for the foreign language learners to use process writing in order to improve writing skills. 2.2 Previous Studies on Peer Feedback Studies on peer feedback have mainly focused on English as a second language (ESL) settings (Carson & Nelson, 1994, 1996; Mangelsdorf, 1992; Mendonca & Johnson, 1994; Nelson & Murphy, 1992, 1993). Nelson and Murphy (1992) examined intermediate ESL students in a writing class, finding that the writing group was successful in terms of the task dimension, studying language, and staying on task, whereas the social dimension of this group was less 663

successful because of overly negative and critical responses. Nelson and Murphy concluded that the participation of the teacher in the group and additional training in positive peer feedback could lead to more positive interaction. Furthermore, Nelson and Murphy (1993) pointed out that whether ESL students incorporate peer suggestions when they revise depends on the nature of the writers interaction with the group members. These studies suggest that the way students interact with peers and teachers may affect their revisions. A study conducted by Mendonca and Johnson (1994) to investigate peer interaction suggested that peer interaction by advanced ESL students was effective to communicate knowledge and enhance development, because the students were able to share thoughts and explain their writing to the reader. Mangelsdorf s (1992) research showed that peer feedback helped ESL students to see a different point of view in the writing and helped them clarify ideas. These studies suggest that peer feedback enables students to shift their thoughts from being writer-centered to reader-oriented, which helps them develop their writing skills. While students may not be able to understand how and what to change by themselves, their readers can show this from a different perspective. Thus, peer feedback provides a powerful learning tool for students to develop their ideas and writing skills, along with increasing their awareness of the audience they are writing for. While peer feedback may seem to have been adopted successfully in ESL settings, little attention has been paid to students of English in Japan. In Kondo s (2004) study, findings suggest that coaching is beneficial for learners to enhance their attention to the task and improve the quality of peer feedback. In contrast, Armstrong s (2004) study reveals that effective peer feedback may be prevented in Japanese students of English due to various elements, including the social dynamics and student beliefs about the teacher s role in the classroom. Likewise, Dyer and Friedrich (2002) have pointed out that peer feedback may not be successful; learners in this group may lack confidence in their ability to judge other students writings and are used to receiving feedback only from their teachers, not peers. For these reasons, it may not necessarily be easy or effective for Japanese students of English to benefit from giving and receiving feedback from peers. 3 The Study Because I was interested in developing group activities to improve writing skills, process writing was implemented, incorporating activities and tasks that learners can actively participate in. 3.1 Participants Participants consisted of 13 college students (all males) majoring in political science and economics at a suburban university in Japan. Participants were students who had enrolled in a 12-week freshman English reading course that met once a week for ninety minute lessons. The study lasted for eight of the twelve weeks. The students had been placed in the class according to placement test scores, and for these students TOEFL scores were 290 to 320. 664

Processes and Process-Orientation in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning 3.2 Setting While writing tasks were incorporated to support and reinforce the reading, emphasis was placed on developing reading skills including scanning and guessing. As the teacher for the class, I employed a variety of language learning activities such as vocabulary exercise, listening practice, pair work, reading aloud in pairs, and group activities. Along with reading skills instruction, I taught process approaches to writing, procedures of which included pre-writing, drafting, peer feedback, and rewriting. 3.3 Procedure After explaining the instrumental procedures, I asked each student to complete two one-paragraph compositions between eighty and one hundred words long. One of the assignments asked, Where do you like to shop? What do you usually do on a shopping trip? The other asked, Do animals have feelings? Talk about an animal you know. Learners were already familiar with the topics, which were relevant to the readings covered in the textbook. In assigning these compositions, I utilized process writing that focuses on each stage: pre-writing, drafting, peer feedback, and rewriting. In the following, I will explain the activities and tasks to develop students writing skills and show how students worked with other students at two stages, the pre-writing and peer feedback stages. 3.3.1 Pre-writing Stage In the first class, I showed a writing sample that was similar to what students were expected to write. In addition, I provided a handout (see Appendix A) with four steps to follow to complete the pre-writing activities. In the first step, students generated ideas in Japanese while working in pairs, writing down their ideas. In the second step, they chose some of the ideas to support their paragraph. In the next step, they listed transitional expressions in English that they might use in their paragraph. I had asked students to find transitional expressions, considering that the students were not used to composing a paragraph in English and that knowledge of these expressions would help them link sentences in a context. To do this, the students first worked in pairs and then worked with the whole class together to make sure that all understood the work. In the final step, I asked the students to think of ways to put their ideas in order; I assigned this step for homework. Another pre-writing activity was a grammar exercise, in which students looked for errors in sentences and corrected them. These erroneous sentences were collected from the previous year s class and classified into five groups based on common problems: articles, subject-verb agreement, verb forms, adjectives and adverbs, and nouns. The purpose of these exercises was to develop students awareness of grammar rules where mistakes commonly occur. I demonstrated ways to find errors and correct them, being engaged in the exercises with pairs of students and finally with the whole class to check answers. Following these pre-writing activities, students wrote the two one-paragraph compositions for homework. 665

3.3.2 Peer Feedback Stage Prior to the peer feedback session, I randomly divided students into three groups: two groups had three students each, and one group had four. Groups, not pairs, were used, because I considered that it would be more comfortable for the students to read more than one other student s draft. Students exchanged the drafts of the two assignments in the group, along with a peer feedback sheet (see Appendix B) for written comments on content and language. I asked them to write comments on the feedback sheet, focusing on the five categories discussed in the grammar exercises to reinforce their awareness of the particular grammar rules. Then I demonstrated how to provide feedback in their peers writing, using one of the student s drafts in the class. After these instructions, students read the group members drafts and filled out the feedback sheets outside of class. While two compositions were assigned separately, students had only one forty-minute peer feedback session to discuss both of their drafts and respond to one another s drafts. Following the peer feedback session, each draft with a peer feedback sheet was returned to the writer for revision. During peer feedback, I had joined one of the groups, in which one student had not come to class and the other participated in the group but had not finished reading the peers drafts and filling out the feedback sheets. After the revision, the students turned in the first and revised drafts of two compositions to me, along with the feedback sheets and a reflective paper. The reflective paper asked students what they had learned from process-centered approaches to writing instruction. 4 Students Voices from the Reflective Paper Of the thirteen participants in this study, eleven reflective papers were examined, because one student did not turn in a paper, and another student s comments were irrelevant to the task. The comments were classified into four phases of writing: process writing, drafting and rewriting, peer feedback, and suggestions. These phases are based on what I was most interested in: studying implementing process approaches to writing instruction. According to their reflective papers, students perceptions of the process-centered approaches to writing appear positive. A frequent comment was that students enjoyed working in groups and pairs as well as reading other students drafts. Some students stated that they had not been taught writing through the process-oriented approach; hence, they could not figure out how the work would develop, whereas if they knew what they were going to do, it might enhance students interest in the tasks and activities used to develop writing skills. One student said that process approaches taught the importance of expressing thoughts, understanding what other students were going to tell, and being motivated to learn English. Although students considered process-oriented writing to be interesting, some wrote that it was not easy to express themselves in English. One student said that he could not easily come up with a sentence to begin a paragraph. Another said, Looking up in a Japanese-English dictionary, there were many English words 666

Processes and Process-Orientation in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning shown as examples. I, however, got confused because I didn t know which English word I could use in the context. There were yet many things I wanted to express in English but I couldn t, so I wish I could. The student added, I always used a dictionary because I wanted to express myself in English. I came up what I wanted to say and then I typed it out after thinking a while, but I made erroneous sentences and consequently couldn t at all express what I really wanted to tell to the audience. These students comments reveal that composing seemed to be a difficult process for them, because the entire context of a paragraph had to be taken into consideration, which differed from writing a single sentence. Accordingly, more English-writing practice might be needed for learners to improve their writing skills, and what they need may not be to write a single sentence at a time, but to compose a paragraph. Regarding peer feedback, I found that students learned from giving and receiving feedback to other peers writing. Some students said that it made them realize that their peers thoughts and opinions seemed to be different from theirs about the same topic. Others, however, said that they had difficulty understanding other peers writings, which were judged not clear enough. Nevertheless, most students agreed that peer feedback was beneficial for them to be aware of their language errors from a different point of view. Two students made suggestions for developing these tasks and activities. One said, We responded to each one s drafts, and might have missed some errors in them. For this reason, I wanted not only other peers but also a teacher to read my drafts. The other student suggested that he needed more time to discuss other peers drafts, since he did not have enough time to finish them. 5 Conclusion The purpose of this paper has been to illustrate activities that develop students writing skills by working with peers. To help the students work in pairs or groups, I developed activities and tasks for pre-writing and peer feedback. The activities and tasks focused on listing ideas and transitional expressions at the pre-writing stage. Students were encouraged to provide comments on content and language at the peer feedback stage. Their comments on the reflective paper has shown that the process writing pedagogies in writing instruction enhanced students awareness of audience and the importance of reading other peers drafts to improve their own writing. For learners, working in groups with peers in order to read their drafts to one another and having opportunities to practice writing in a given context may be of great use. Those activities help learners to develop a working knowledge of English and to use that working knowledge in writing. At the same time, language teachers need to develop peer-group activities through which learners awareness of audience and language would be increased. References Armstrong, S. (2004). The nature of peer response in Japanese university writing classes. Paper presented at JALT 2004 Conference, Tezukayama University, Nara, 2004. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1994). Writing Groups: Cross-Cultural Issues. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (1), 17-30. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese Students Perceptions of ESL: Peer Response 667

Group Interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5 (1), 1-19. Dyer, B., & Friedrich, L. (2002). The Personal Narrative as Cultural Artifact: Teaching Autobiography in Japan. Written Communication, 19 (2), 265-296. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College English, 44, 765-777. Furneaux, C. (1998). Process writing. In Johnson, K. & Johnson, H. (Eds.), Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics (pp. 257-260). Oxford: Blackwell. Hillocks, G., Jr. (1989). Synthesis of research on teaching writing. From educational leadership by George Hillocks, Jr. Johnson, K., & Johnson, H. (Eds.). (1998). Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. Kondo, Y. (2004). Enhancing Student Writing through Peer Review Coaching. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 15, 189-198. Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer Reviews in the ESL Composition Classroom: What Do the Students Think? ELT Journal, 46 (3), 274-285. Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction, TESOL Quarterly, 28 (4), 745-769. Murray, D. M. (1987). Write to Learn. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1992). An L2 Writing Group: Task and Social Dimensions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1 (3), 171-193. Nelson, G. L., & Murphy, J. M. (1993). Peer Response Groups: Do L2 Writers Use Peer Comments in Revising Their Drafts? TESOL Quarterly, 27 (1), 135-141. 668

Processes and Process-Orientation in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Appendix A Brainstorming Activity in Class STEP 1 思いつくことを日本語で ( もちろん英語でもいいです ) 何でも書いてみましょう 箇条書きでも OK! STEP 2 宿題のテーマに合致するよう 上記からいくつか選んでみましょう STEP 3 作文をする際にどんな接続詞が必要ですか 辞書で調べてみましょう (For example, because, if, first, second... etc) STEP 4 どんな順番で書くとまとまりのある文になるか考えてみましょう 669

Appendix B Peer Feedback Sheet Homework #1 #2 Reviewer s name: Writer s name: STEP 1:Comment on Content( 内容に関するコメントを書きましょう ): STEP 2:Comment on Language( 次のコードを用いて 修正したほうがよいと思われる箇所を指摘してあげましょう そして 直接 宿題に記入してあげましょう ) Error Correction Code: 1: 冠詞 2: 主語と動詞の不一致 3: 動詞 4: 品詞 5: 名詞の数 そのほかに気が付いたことがあれば修正する際に役立つので コメントしてあげましょう 670