Turnitin peer feedback: controversial vs. non-controversial essays

被引:0
|
作者
Mohammed Abdullah Alharbi
Ali H. Al-Hoorie
机构
[1] Faculty of Education,Department of English
[2] Majmaah University,undefined
[3] English Language and Preparatory Year Institute,undefined
[4] Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu,undefined
关键词
Turnitin; Peer review; Controversial topics; Critical feedback; Online feedback;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Although an important goal of learner peer feedback is promoting critical thinking, little attention has been paid to the nature of the topic, particularly whether it is controversial. In this article, we report on a study where 52 English majors were asked to comment on essays written by their peers using the PeerMark module of Turnitin. Half of the essays were about controversial topics in the Saudi society (e.g., women driving and banning cigarettes), whereas the other half were less controversial (e.g., importance of sleep and respecting parents). Our results showed that the participants provided significantly more critical, global comments on controversial essays. At the same time, this increase in global comments did not come at the expense of local, language-related comments—in that the participants did not provide significantly fewer language comments on controversial essays. The participants also reported favorable attitudes toward this task due to the convenience and anonymity of online feedback, thus allowing them to express their opinions more freely on controversial topics. We therefore concluded that utilizing an online platform that permits double-blind peer review on controversial essays seems to have to the potential to stimulate critical thinking among language learners.
引用
下载
收藏
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [31] In-reference to sources: Peer-reviewed vs. non-peer-reviewed articles, proceedings, and unpublished data
    Narayan, B
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2001, 83A (09): : 1431 - 1432
  • [32] Anthropomorphic vs. non-anthropomorphic software interface feedback for online systems usage
    Murano, P
    UNIVERSAL ACCESS: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES, PRACTICE, AND EXPERIENCE, 2003, 2615 : 339 - 349
  • [33] In-reference to sources: Peer-reviewed vs. non-peer-reviewed articles, proceedings, and unpublished data - Reply
    Einhorn, TA
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2001, 83A (09): : 1432 - 1432
  • [34] Diagnostic values of 2 different techniques for controversial lumbar disc herniation by conventional imaging examination: 3D-DESS vs. CT plain scan
    Liu, Wei
    Chen, Jinhua
    Zhang, Yanan
    Wang, Xu
    Zheng, Junwen
    Huang, Aibing
    Chen, Chunmao
    Bian, Jian
    Yang, Lei
    Li, Haijun
    FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY, 2022, 13
  • [35] Effects of Trained Peer vs. Teacher Feedback on EFL Students' Writing Performance, Self-Efficacy, and Internalization of Motivation
    Cui, Ying
    Schunn, Christian D.
    Gai, Xiaosong
    Jiang, Ying
    Wang, Zhe
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 12
  • [36] SELF-PERCEPTION VS. PEER REPUTATION OF BULLYING VICTIMIZATION IN RELATION TO NON-CLINICAL PSYCHOTIC EXPERIENCES
    Gromann, Paula M.
    Goosens, Frits
    Olthof, Tjeert
    Pronk, Jeroen
    Krabbendam, Lydia
    SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH, 2012, 136 : S113 - S113
  • [37] Incidental corrective feedback provision for formulaic vs. Non-formulaic errors: EFL teachers' beliefs and practices
    Gholami, Leila
    LANGUAGE AWARENESS, 2022, 31 (01) : 21 - 52
  • [38] Feedforward vs. Feedback Fixed-Parameter H2 Control of Non-Stationary Noise
    Latos, Mariusz
    Pawelczyk, Marek
    ARCHIVES OF ACOUSTICS, 2009, 34 (04) : 521 - 535
  • [39] Benefits of social vs. non-social feedback on learning and generosity. Results from the Tipping Game
    Colombo, Matteo
    Stankevicius, Aistis
    Series, Peggy
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 5