The effect of face-to-face versus web-based structured peer review on writing improvement: Evidence from ESP students

Abstract

Engaging students in peer review to improve their writing has become a pedagogical approach. However, little evidence has supported the effects of web-based (WB) peer evaluation on students’ writing enhancement. Correspondingly, the present study, employing a quasi-experimental design, investigated the effect of WB versus face-to-face (FTF) peer review on ESP students’ writing in terms of linguistic features. To this aim, three intact classes (N = 48, 53) were split into two experimental and one control groups at random. The results of pretests revealed that all the participants were homogenous with respect to language proficiency and writing ability based on Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT) and a writing test. While there was no peer review for the control group, the two experimental groups practiced peer review; one through FTF interaction and one via Peermark, a WB program provided through Turnitin. The findings indicated that the experimental group outperformed the control group. The findings also showed that FTF group outperformed WB group in writing. However, the analysis of linguistic features in the two modes of peer review demonstrated that WB interaction can be more effective in writing fluency than FTF peer review. Implementation of the findings for the teachers and teacher trainers has been discussed.