Application Of Collaborative Learning-Peer Revision In EFL Writing

Collaborative learning can mean many things, from peer revision to multiple-authored essays. Kenneth Bruffee has led the call for a collaborative approach to composition since the 1970s. However, it seems something new in China. Many college English teachers in China find marking to be a tedious and unrewarding chore. While it is a crucial aspect of writing process, teachers' diligent attention and careful comments only rarely seem to bring about improvements in subsequent work and better performance in CET-4. How can English teachers aid their students in promoting writing ability? Considering the limited time of teaching college English and a large number of students face the teacher, this article put forward an alternative way of correcting writing, that is, correcting writing through peer revision. Three theories were used to support the strategy of peer revision: Bruffee's collaborative learning, Piaget's equilibration, and Vigotsky's ZPD. This study sought to investigate the effect of peer revision on EFL writing. Three intact classes of freshmen (n=199) from the same department were randomly assigned to experimental and control conditions. The experimental classes received guidelines of peer revision according to peer revision method before the study, whereas the control class followed the traditional way of teacher responding. Two questions were addressed: (1) Compared with the traditional way of teacher revision, will peer revision strategy lead to more gains in writing? (2) If peer revision is an effective way of improving writing ability, therefore, what factor will influence the results of peer revision and student writers' perceptions of writing? Questionnaires were completed by all students before the study and the post-questionnaires were completed by the experimental students. Interviews were conducted with a selection of students after the study. Writing performance, at the beginning and end of the study, was measured and compared with a third group that did not use the peer revision strategy. An analysis of pre- and post-tests revealed that peer revision groups scored higher than the control group. In addition, the size of peer revision group influenced the results and student writers' perceptions of writing. The study suggests that peer revision can help writer have a sense of reader and help them pay much attention to global errors than local errors. Since the findings of the study demonstrated that peer revision groups scored higher than the traditional group did, the author suggested that the strategy of peer revision be used in a small scope.