Quantitative analysis adjustment

Implementation of EFL Peer Feedback in EFL Classroom Implementation of EFL Peer Feedback in EFL Classroom In the educational context, most exams, whether testing a student’s foreign language abilities or other educational skills, often rely on the student's writing skills to measure their knowledge. Despite this, writing receives relatively limited attention in the educational system, which may impact its overall development. Writing effectively is crucial to acquiring and mastering English as a Foreign Language (EFL) (Nguyen, 2016). Effective writing not only aids communication but also nurtures critical thinking and analytical skills. Historically, the examination and instruction of EFL writing have experienced notable changes, progressing from relative unfamiliarity to becoming central in modern language training (Howard & Smith, 2014). With English’s developing importance in the world throughout the second half of this century, EFL writing has become a common occurrence. In addition, globalization and subsequent societal changes have heightened the need for proficient written English (Howatt & Smith, 2014). As a result, teachers and scholars started to reassess and broaden their methods of teaching EFL writing. Research into EFL writing instruction started to thrive, examining various methods, techniques, and evaluation measures. The focus on EFL writing has become even more pronounced in the modern age. The emergence of digital technologies, internet communication, and worldwide collaboration has emphasized the importance of proficient writing abilities. Studies in this domain have evolved to address a broad spectrum of concerns, encompassing writing evaluation and input on the influence of customs on writing methodologies (Howatt & Smith, 2014). Recently, an instructional approach that has gained significant acknowledgment and garnered attention in EFL writing situations is the utilization of peer feedback. Peer feedback strategy, also known as peer review, is the learning process whereby the student is allowed to review another student's written work and offer feedback (Liu & Carless, 2006). Thereafter, students are asked to revise their work based on received feedback. In this research study, I embarked on a design intervention process. In this crucial step, I established a clear objective based on the issues identified during the problem exploration stage. Various potential interventions were considered, each aiming to achieve the set goal. Recognizing the need for expert guidance, I consulted the school's principal, who formerly served as a pedagogical supervisor for languages. Her extensive knowledge and expertise in this area, combined with evidence from relevant literature, were invaluable in selecting the most appropriate strategies to implement in the subsequent phases of the research. The present study aims to understand whether peer feedback improves Belgian students’ writing skills. It aims to assess the efficiency of peer feedback as a teaching technique in EFL and determine the extent of student involvement in the peer feedback process. The following research questions are designed to guide our research investigation: 1 What are the impacts of implementing EFL peer feedback within educational settings? Research sub-questions are: 1 How can EFL teachers integrate peer feedback effectively in EFL instruction? 2 What influence do the various proficiency levels among peer’s influence feedback efficacy? 3 To what extent does EFL peer feedback improve independent writing skills? The research hypothesizes that organized implementation of peer feedback in a classroom focused on EFL writing will result in a statistically notable enhancement in students' writing abilities. Theoretical Framework Peer Feedback Strategy Peer response strategies have existed as a teaching method in English writing and composition classrooms for many years. Peer feedback transpires in oral or written form and occurs in either pairs or small groups (Connor & Asenavage, 1994). Cui et al. (2021) reiterate that peer reviews and feedback remain an active learning process with benefits, including improving students' critical thinking and writing skills. More often than not, peer feedback offers students the opportunity to improve their work before final submission (Cui et al., 2021). Research shows that peers can offer valuable contributions to other students' writing skills by offering feedback from a reader’s perspective (Peterson, 2010). Peterson (2010) highlights the key impacts of peer feedback on students, including helping stuck students’ progress with their writing work, offering room for seeking clarification or information, questioning ideas, and expressing emotional responses to written text (Peterson, 2010). More so, peer feedback reiterates and aligns with Donald Groves’ five-step writing procedure including the pre-writing stage, drafting, revising, editing, and publication stage. These stages of writing, especially peer editing, are highly important to investigating EFL peer feedback implementation (Marzano, 2004). The pre-writing stage allows students to develop topics based on their experiences, stick to their interests, and build ideas on the presented challenges (Kamal & Faraj, 2015). Drafting facilitates creating rough drafts and perfecting content while revising allows re-reading and sharing thoughts. EFL students can significantly benefit from this stage through discussions, instructor guidance, and accepting and reflecting feedback while figuring out ways to implement it (Huang, 2022). The editing phase is characterized by restructuring and correction of any mechanical errors, at this stage, EFL students can learn and improve their writing for quality performance, which is then presented in the publication phase. With peer reviews and feedback, errors in students' writing are minimized, encouraging learning, and offering alternatives, especially when students are passive in responding to teacher feedback (Amira & Samiha, 2019). Teachers have a role to play in the peer review process by ensuring that students have the skills to give feedback and revise their drafts based on provided feedback, so they improve the quality of their writing. Howatt and Smith (2014) write that teachers have quite several reasons for implementing peer feedback in an EFL setting. First, peer readers offer important feedback, which allows peer writers to revise their work based on the comments provided. Secondly, peer feedback is different from the teacher’s feedback in the sense that teacher feedback tends to be general, whereas peer feedback is more specific (Yu & Lee, 2016). Finally, becoming a critical reader of other peers’ work makes students critical readers and revisers of their pieces of writing. Finally, peer review and feedback encourage students to play a central role in the writing process, thus allowing them to obtain much-needed information from others to improve their writing. By integrating peer feedback into an EFL classroom, learners not only benefit from direct peer feedback but also get the chance to participate in a community of practice, thus fostering responsibility for their learning. Social Constructivist Theory The theoretical foundation for implementing EFL peer feedback lies in social constructivism, which asserts that knowledge is actively built through significant exchanges within social and cultural settings. This viewpoint is based on the research developed by Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky, who theorized that students learn about the world around them from the More Knowledgeable Others (MKOs). The MOKs, according to him, are teachers, students, or authors. Strategies supported by social constructivist theory include collaboration and conferences with mentors (McRobbie & Tobin, 1997). Vanhaltren (2016) states that the basis of social constructivism theory is self-efficacy, based on the social learning theory designed by Albert Bandura. With self-efficacy, there is a foundation of motivation, well-being, and personal accomplishment. In agreement, Papastergiou (2006) argues that knowledge is formed individually but developed within cultural context through interactions, enhancing individual and communal awareness of the specific element under study. The author further informs that support within collaborative environments aids in efficient task accomplishment and eliminating potential or existing tasks affecting individuals or the group (PaPastergiou, 2006). Peer feedback aligns with the social constructivist education viewpoint; when students participate in peer feedback exercises, they actively engage in a communal exchange where they converse and evaluate one another's written work (Papastergiou, 2006). Vygotsky further expanded the social constructivist perspective by introducing the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Lev Vygotsky argues that the Zone of Proximal Development symbolizes the mental area amidst what a student can achieve independently and what they can accomplish with suitable direction and assistance from external or surrounding factors (McLeod, 2023). McLeod (2023) affirms that ideal learning occurs in the ZPD, pushing learners to expand their abilities while offering support to connect the difference between current skills and future growth. McLeod (2023) argues that peer feedback aligns strongly with ZPD by offering a mechanism for students or learners to support one another in the learning process. Often, peers will offer insights, suggestions, and constructive criticism that fall within the learner's ZPD, thus helping them to bridge the gap between what they can do independently and what they can achieve with support from other knowledgeable peers. Collaborative Document Editing (CDE) The innovative aspect of this EFL peer feedback intervention revolves around Collaborative Document Editing (CDE). This method prioritizes promoting cooperation and establishing a shared educational setting where learners can utilize the opportunity of shared learning from one another's abilities, limitations, and distinct viewpoints (Kanno, 2020). The collaboration fostered through CDE aligns with Vygotsky’s Social Constructivist Perspective, which holds that optimal learning transpires whenever learners are challenged beyond their present capabilities often with direct support and adequate instructions (Papastergiou, 2006). CDE is distinguished by essential characteristics which include critical thinking among players, increased communication skills, and teamwork which foster collaboration and cooperation (Kanno, 2020). Additionally, CDE allows learners to communicate and seek help or explanation where necessary, thus fostering a supportive and engaging learning environment inside their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The basic principle of this approach is to share a document with other peers for assessment, thus encouraging a culture of reading, assessing peers' work, and offering suggestions necessary to enhance a document. Sarit (2017) states that CDE has benefits such as increased analytical reasoning, increased textual understanding, and an enhanced collaborative learning environment (Sarita, 2017). More so, during the CDE process, learners learn about the iterative nature of writing including being able to draft a paper, seek feedback, evaluate and improve the paper based on feedback received, and edit their written work as recommended by Graves' Theory (Kamal & Faraj, 2015). Unlike the traditional system of feedback which gave little emphasis to feedback, CDE allows learners to engage in an instant involvement (Chomsky, 2019). Conclusion The theoretical framework sets a foundation for understanding peer feedback and its integration in an EFL classroom. The combination of principles such as peer feedback strategy, social constructivist theory, and Donald Graves's five-step writing process, sets the basis for understanding how the integration of these elements enhances writing skills and language development among EFL learners. Intervention The intervention section offers an opportunity to understand the role of peer feedback in an EFL setting. Regarding existing theoretical underpinnings, the adopted intervention frameworks apply theory to explore and understand the effects of organized peer feedback on EFL English learner's writing skills. The instruction facilitation process and the exercise of peer grouping are explored in this section. Instruction Facilitation in EFL Peer Feedback Instruction facilitation forms the basis of a successful peer feedback process in the sense that it enhances both delivery and criteria for explicit instructions. The ability of the instructor to offer clear and comprehensible instructions and guidelines ensures that there is a focused, systematic, and positive evaluation process (Cui et al., 2021). Clear and comprehensive standards set the basis for creating appropriate standards for valuable feedback, which eliminates ambiguity in any measure qualifying as a useful input. More so, they define the key elements that must be assessed in peer writing, hence a well-structured framework for those giving feedback (Cui et al., 2021). The mapped-out precision and clarity ensures that learners do not just participate in the editing process, but do so with accuracy and intention, aligning with the guided education principles put forth by Vygotsky (Papastergiou, 2006). Guides and instructions ensure that there an effective and yet impactful peer feedback sessions. They actively promote and enhance peer sessions to directly align with set research goals and sociocultural learning principles. more so, the concept of scaffolding as reiterated in ZPD, entails offering temporary support to learners. In the context of peer feedback, peers offer guidance, examples, or explanations to help each other understand and improve their work. Peers will scaffold the learning process by providing feedback tailored to the learner's current abilities, gradually increasing the level of challenge and facilitating growth in understanding and skill. Huang (2022) argues that the scaffolding techniques are thoughtfully integrated into the EFL writing environment, offering students structured support and guidance during peer evaluation. The aim is to enhance students' understanding of effective feedback methods and foster their development as proficient peer evaluators. Teachers provide clear guidance in offering valuable feedback, emphasizing the significance of precise, practical suggestions that promote growth (Huang, 2022). They stimulate meaningful discussions by posing thought-provoking questions and prompts that encourage students to reflect deeply on their writing and the feedback they receive (McLeod, 2023). Peer Grouping Establishing peer groups during the intervention signifies an intentional and careful procedure directed by the overarching goal of maximizing the efficiency of peer input within the English as a Foreign Language writing learning environment. A pre-test and language proficiency levels serve as the basis for grouping, as students with similar language abilities tend to share comparable writing skills (Kamal & Faraj, 2015). Grouping students based on language skills ensures that the feedback they give and receive aligns closely with their developmental needs (McLeod, 2023). This approach enables students to engage in meaningful discussions, draw connections from their writing, and receive constructive feedback that fosters progress and advancement. However, this approach has potential limitations that require addressing for effective group outcomes. For example, there is a likelihood of homogenized feedback, a situation where everyone can give the same insights. There is also a possibility that learners’ advanced learners will fall out of the grouping due to their continued language development, and therefore, frequent adjustment of the groups is needed. This adaptability lets learners make adjustments in their Zone of Proximal Development therefore aligning with the dynamic development of each student as argued in Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of Development (Bodrova & Leong, 1998). Moreover, the categorizationmethod takes into account other items as well, for example, past writing processes and experiences, behavioral patterns, symbols, and languages. With these diverse aspects put into consideration, the establishment of peer groups seeks to establish a united learning setting whereby students can utilize their combined abilities, offer culturally aware input, and navigate all the complexities of intercultural communication flexibility and sensitivity. Assessment Impact on Writing Skills Integrating pre-tests and post-tests into this intervention is critical as it offers comprehensive and detailed peer input into learners' writing skills. Through this assessment, there is a detailed examination of students writing abilities in line with Graves' five-stage writing process. Assessments further reveal the multifaceted nature of the students writing work across a wider spectrum of skills including written expression, proficiency, and ethics. Pre-assessment, which comes first, establishes a criterion that identifies a learner's writing proficiency before organized peer feedback is introduced (Kamal & Faraj, 2015). These evaluations shed light on student writing competencies, typically their abilities in the early stages to build strong arguments, compile research, and follow basic writing rules. More so, in the pre-tests, students demonstrate the ability to generate ideas on their own, to identify and eliminate mistakes in the writing process, and to sponge through constructive criticism (Kamal & Faraj, 2015). They form the basis of understanding writing aptitudes, which teachers depend upon to know learners' writing capacity, make a fair assessment of their writing skills, and track progress and successes (Huang, 2022). Furthermore, the post-test assessment remains instrumental in assessing intervention impacts, especially the role of peer feedback in EFL writing skills. Methodology and Planning Criteria for Participant Selection In this experimental study, there were three classes of pupils from a Belgium school in their 5th year of TSO secondary education. The first class comprised 25 students while the second class had a total of 7 students. In addition, another class which comprised 16 students in the same educational stage served as a control group. One of the major criteria used was the learner’s language proficiency or level of English. Language proficiency levels were measured by standardized language proficiency tests depending on how long a student had English language and their fluency in reading, writing, listening, and understanding level. This approach resulted in a broader range of linguistic issues being addressed in the feedback process, benefiting all participants. Data Collection The data collection process for the intervention incorporated a range of methods, including surveys and moderator observations. Quantitative data were analysed using Microsoft Excel with measures such as mean, standard deviation, and the t-test as measures of possible relationships between study variables. A combination of methods was utilized for qualitative data, comprising surveys, direct observations, and narrative analysis. The survey questionnaire was a combination of open-ended (1 question) and closed-ended questions (11 questions). The 12 questions were divided into five sections, each with different responses from participants. The first part sought responses on students' overall evaluation of the impact of peer feedback on their writing skills, namely content, organization, language use, and mechanics, with measurement used being “slight improvement,” “moderate improvement,” and “considerable improvement.” The remaining parts related to the specific evaluation of peer feedback, including openness to feedback, comfortability of giving feedback, comparison of peer feedback to teacher feedback, ability to encourage others to participate in peer sessions, and experiences on specific moments during peer feedback sessions. Measurement in the other categories varied, including “Moderately, Significant, Slightly, and Not at all” in one category and “Very comfortable, Somewhat comfortable, and Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable” in another. Others were “Better, About the same, or Worse.” In addition, the direct observation method was used, where the teacher took notes and recorded learner interactions in the EFL classroom. Additionally, narrative analysis was used to deepen the understanding of the qualitative aspects of the collected data. These data collection methods allowed for a comprehensive examination of peer feedback's effectiveness in improving EFL learners' writing skills. These methods helped gather insights on peer assessment experiences from educators and students, focusing on student engagement, feedback quality, and session involvement. To ensure that these methods were fully effective, there was a well-established protocol in place, with well-set standards and criteria. The protocol was well set to assess the overall quality of discussions and verify that peer feedback was in agreement with the set guidance. For more enhanced sessions, a website was created to support students in the effective application of feedback strategies, essay structure analysis, writing style requirements, content analysis, thesis statement construction, compliance with writing standards, sentence formulation, guided feedback reflection, and other skills critical in good writing. Consequently, participants also learned how to give detailed, constructive, research-aligned feedback with consideration of key factors such as content, organization, language proficiency, mechanics, and adherence to ideal writing conventions. This strategy allowed for constant feedback that concentrated on the fundamental aspects of writing. Feedback training The research intervention began with a thorough pre-assessment section, where selected students individually crafted essays on specified topics provided in the Appendix. This crucial step of the research study served as a baseline for evaluating language proficiency at an individual level while identifying areas for improvement, thus guiding subsequent peer groupings and feedback training sessions. Following the pre-assessment, students were arranged into groups of three based on their initial performance, marking the onset of 20-minute feedback training sessions conducted twice a week for three weeks. The small groups allowed students to actively engage, articulate their ideas, and cooperate efficiently without individual shyness getting in the way. Furthermore, each feedback session led to small tasks, including thesis development, checking and understanding writing conventions, and developing transitional body paragraphs, among others. Collaborative document editing (CDE) was used within the groups to enable collaboration and togetherness in the learning process. To maintain independence in the evaluation of the effect of peer feedback without any outside influence, instructors kept the pre-test results from students during the study, so that the teacher feedback did not affect their writing. The effect of teacher feedback will be examined independently in the later research evaluations, preserving the research integrity. Feedback-guided reflections played a great role in ensuring that instructors incorporated feedback in EFL writing to achieve positive results. Besides guided reflection, there was the feedback integration reflection, where earlier feedbacks were used; the comparison reflection, in which students compared comments from each other; and the language skill emphasis reflection, in which students focused on language proficiency. On completion of training, the next intervention was a post-test where students had to do an essay and then share it with the group members through CDE. The group members could practice the skills they learned in the feedback sessions by reviewing each other's essays. In the post-test, learners gave their opinions on several things including word count, sentence structure and connection, subject-verb agreement, spelling, and noun usage. Furthermore, they offered their opinions and suggestions on critical writing skills such as the development of the thesis, organization, structure, and any other notable discrepancies. Peer editing allowed learners to request clarification about specific details, themes and arguments, and essay language. An individual post-test was conducted to assess and evaluate each student’s mastery of EFL writing skills which also pinpointed areas of learning difficulties and progress. To maintain the independence of the impact of peer feedback, the pre-test results were kept from pupils during the study, preventing teacher feedback from influencing their writing. The effect of teacher feedback would be separately assessed in later evaluations, ensuring the research's integrity. Guided feedback reflections were critical in helping instructors integrate feedback into EFL writing for improved results. Other types of guided reflection included feedback integration reflection, which incorporated previous responses; comparison reflection, in which students compared comments from peers; and language skill emphasis reflection, which emphasized language proficiency. Upon completion of training, the intervention progressed to a post-test phase, where each student was expected to write an essay and then share it with their group members through CDE. Group members had the opportunity to apply what they had learned in feedback sessions by reviewing each other's essays. They offered suggestions on various aspects, such as subject-verb agreement, word count, spelling, and noun usage. Additionally, they provided positive or negative feedback on the essay's topic, structure, and any inconsistencies. Peer editing also enabled students to inquire about specific details, arguments, and essay language use. The individual post-test was designed to assess and evaluate each student's grasp of EFL writing skills, thus identifying individual learning needs and progress. The post-test also allowed students to reflect on how the peer feedback and collaborative writing process influenced their learning journey individually. By incorporating these individual reflections and assessments, the intervention sought to ensure a well-rounded evaluation of each student's capabilities in the context of peer feedback through CDE intervention. Ethical considerations Ethical considerations are of great importance in research. In this research study, the main ethical consideration includes fair participant treatment, consent and privacy, and equity. To adhere to ethical considerations all study participants were treated equally and fairly. Fair treatment refers to the lack of bias or discrimination based on gender, age, sex, or language. Participants were informed earlier about set study goals, their expected contribution, and roles which allowed them to make an informed consent. Other ethical considerations given attention include confidentially and privacy where participants' data was collected and stored with adherence to data protection principles. Researchers equally avoided any form of prejudice and ensured that formal research approvals were obtained from relevant ethical authorities before research began. Reliability and Validity The research methodology adopted different approaches to attain...