ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
25
DEVELOPING WRITING COMPETENCE IN SECONDARY SCHOOL
LEARNERS VIA PEER REVIEW STRATEGIES
Mamaniyazova Nodira
Teacher at the department of “General science”
Narpay Foreign Language Faculty
Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15754474
Abstract
This article explores the effectiveness of peer feedback in enhancing writing
competence among high school students. Rooted in Vygotsky’s sociocultural
theory and Piaget’s constructivist approach, peer feedback encourages learners
to engage actively in the writing process through collaborative evaluation. By
providing and receiving feedback, students develop critical thinking,
metacognitive awareness, and greater ownership of their learning. The article
discusses various models of peer feedback, highlights implementation
challenges, and presents empirical evidence supporting its positive impact on
writing fluency and accuracy. Ultimately, the paper argues that peer feedback,
when guided and structured effectively, serves as a powerful pedagogical tool
for fostering writing development in secondary education.
Keywords
:
Peer feedback, writing competence, high school students,
collaborative learning, metacognition, Vygotsky, constructivism, critical thinking,
student-centered learning, formative assessment
In the wake of educational reforms in Uzbekistan that emphasize learner-
centered pedagogy, peer feedback has emerged as a transformative strategy in
developing writing skills, particularly among high school students. As education
systems strive to shift from traditional methods to more interactive and
reflective learning practices, peer feedback enables students not only to revise
their writing but also to become active participants in their learning journey.
Peer feedback is defined as the process where students evaluate and
provide constructive suggestions on each other's written work. This method
moves beyond surface-level corrections, encouraging deeper engagement with
textual coherence, structure, argumentation, and clarity. Topping emphasizes
that when students review their peers’ work, they develop critical thinking,
reflection, and metacognitive awareness, all of which are essential for becoming
autonomous writers
1
.
1
Topping, K. (2009).
Peer Assessment
.
Theory Into Practice
, 48(1), 20-27.
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
26
The theoretical foundation of peer feedback rests on Vygotsky’s Zone of
Proximal Development (ZPD), where learners improve through guided
interaction with more capable peers
2
. When students provide or receive
feedback, they operate within this zone, supporting each other’s development.
Moreover, the collaborative nature of peer feedback reflects constructivist
principles emphasizing knowledge construction through active problem-solving
and social interaction.
The implementation of peer feedback in high school settings shows
promising results. As students analyze their classmates’ texts, they inevitably
reflect on their own writing, thus gaining greater insight into effective writing
techniques. According to Shin and Crandall, peer feedback not only improves
writing fluency but also fosters motivation and accountability among learners
3
.
When students know that their work will be reviewed by peers, they are more
likely to invest effort into producing quality writing.
A key advantage of peer feedback is its role in fostering metacognitive skills.
Students become more aware of their own learning processes and develop
strategies to self-assess and improve. Metacognitive development is directly
linked to improved academic performance, especially in writing. Thus, peer
feedback acts as a powerful formative assessment tool.
However, despite its benefits, peer feedback is not without challenges.
Students may lack the skills or confidence to critique effectively. In some cases,
social dynamics hinder honest evaluation. Therefore, teacher scaffolding is
essential. Educators must provide clear guidelines, rubrics, and modeling to
ensure feedback is meaningful.
In terms of practical classroom strategies, various models of peer feedback
have been applied: traditional peer review, reciprocal peer feedback,
collaborative group feedback, and digital platforms. Each model caters to
different learning contexts and student needs. Online peer feedback tools can
enhance the depth and clarity of feedback by allowing more structured and
interactive commenting.
2
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978).
Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes
. Harvard University Press.
3
Shin, J.K., & Crandall, J. (2014).
Teaching Young Learners English: Theory to
Practice
. National Geographic Learning, p. 110.
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
27
Evidence from longitudinal studies affirms the long-term effectiveness of
peer feedback. Van den Berg et al. demonstrate that students involved in regular
peer feedback activities show greater improvement in organization, clarity, and
coherence of their writing over time. This suggests that peer feedback
contributes not only to immediate learning outcomes but also to sustained
academic growth.
In conclusion, peer feedback represents a shift toward a more inclusive,
reflective, and collaborative form of learning that aligns well with the
pedagogical goals of modern education in Uzbekistan. By empowering students
to evaluate and learn from each other, peer feedback promotes critical literacy,
independence, and deeper engagement with writing as a cognitive and
communicative act.
References:
1.
Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolding peer assessment with
templates: A longitudinal study of writing and peer feedback. Computers &
Education, 49(4), 1464–1482.
2.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random
House.
3.
Li, L. (2017). The effectiveness of peer feedback in writing: A meta-
analysis. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 1–17.
4.
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐
regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice.
Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
5.
Shin, J. K., & Crandall, J. (2014). Teaching Young Learners English: From
Theory to Practice. National Geographic Learning.
6.
Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27.
7.
Van den Berg, M., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2012). Peer feedback in peer
assessment: A study of the influence of peer feedback on the quality of students’
writing. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 38(4), 259–269.
8.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher
Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
9.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-Regulated Learning and
Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives (2nd ed.). Routledge
