Abstract:Peer assessment is a common pedagogical practice for evaluating students' writing in college English classrooms. However, in-depth research on the learning outcomes after peer assessment is scarce and inconsistent; how peer feedback is used has not been fully explored either. This study compared peer feedback to teacher feedback and explored the different features of feedback and its impact on draft revision. Two specific research questions were answered in this study: (1) In which aspects can peer feedback supplement teacher feedback in improving the linguistic features in writing? (2) What are the differences in features of peer feedback versus teacher feedback? And how do they connect to feedback take-in? Two writing tasks were assigned to 94 students. One received teacher feedback and the other peer feedback. Pre-feedback and post-feedback writings in both tasks (4 sets in total) were scored and human ratings were adjusted using Many-Facet Rasch modeling to control for differences in leniency. Drawing on three natural language processing (NLP) tools, this study also assessed writing qualities by comparing 22 selected indices related to the scoring rubrics for human raters, which involve three dimensions: cohesion, lexical quality and syntactic complexity. Peer and teacher feedback was then coded based on features of feedback to explore their influence on draft revision. The results showed that both peer and teacher feedback had positive effects on rating scores. We confirmed peer feedback as an effective classroom approach to improve writing, though limited compared to teacher feedback as reflected in the indices. In terms of feedback features, students often stopped at identifying the language problems, while the teacher provided more explanations, solutions or suggestions regarding the problems identified. Implications for peer feedback research and implementation of peer assessment activities are provided.

ReadME – Generating Personalized Feedback for Essay Writing Using the ReaderBench Framework

Comparative Study about the Impacts of Chinese Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) Feedback and Teacher Feedback on Middle School Students’ Writing Practice

Automated Essay Feedback Generation and Its Impact on Revision

PapagAI:Automated Feedback for Reflective Essays

Extracting and Clustering Main Ideas from Student Feedback Using Language Models

PeerBERT: Automated Characterization of Peer Review Comments across Courses

Automated feedback and writing: a multi-level meta-analysis of effects on students' performance

Closing the Loop: Learning to Generate Writing Feedback via Language Model Simulated Student Revisions

The role and features of peer assessment feedback in college English writing

Effective Interfaces for Student-Driven Revision Sessions for Argumentative Writing

The Impact of Automated Evaluation Feedback on Students’ Writing Revision

GEEF: A neural network model for automatic essay feedback generation by integrating writing skills assessment

From process to product: writing engagement and performance of EFL learners under computer-generated feedback instruction

Learner Uptake with Automated Feedback and Teacher Feedback in an Online EFL Writing Context

Developing student feedback literacy through self and peer assessment interventions

From copying to learning: using exemplars to engage students with assessment criteria and feedback

The Generation of Automated Learner Feedback Based on Individual Proficiency Levels

Using teacher-supported peer feedback to develop student feedback literacy in L2 writing: An instructional model

Peer-to-peer dialogue about teachers’ written feedback enhances students’ understanding on how to improve writing skills

PROBING INTO STUDENTS’ USE OF AUTOMATED FEEDBACK IN ESSAY REVISION: A CASE STUDY OF TWO CHINESE EFL LEARNERS

Unraveling the effects of rubrics and exemplars on student writing performance.