INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 04,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 1338
THE EFFECT OF PEER FEEDBACK ON WRITING SKILLS IN
LANGUAGE LEARNING
Mirtillayeva Nozima
Chirchik State Pedagogical University 4
th
year student of the Faculty of Tourism,
Foreign Language and Literature (English)
Usmonova Gulsevar Abdulaziz kizi
Supervisor: Teacher of Chirchik State Pedagogical University
E-mail:
Abstract:
It was also shown that feedback is more useful between drafts, and little
improvement is made when it is done at the end of the task. Reichelt points out that the
teachers are uncertain about the role of writing in EFL classrooms. In her survey, she found
that articles on FL writing appeared in publications addressing FL professionals, suggesting
that many of those engaged in FL writing research and pedagogy see themselves as primarily
language teachers rather than writing teachers. Due to the fact that in traditional writing
classrooms students are passive in the classroom, they naturally feel uncomfortable with
cooperative interaction methods that require them to take a more active role.
Keywords:
feedback implementation, learning, peer feedback, peer review, revisions.
Annotatsiya:
Shuningdek, teskari aloqa qoralamalar orasida foydaliroq bo‘lishi, topshiriq
oxirida bajarilganda esa unchalik yaxshilanishga erishilmasligi ko‘rsatildi. Reyxeltning
ta'kidlashicha, o'qituvchilar EFL sinflarida yozishning roli haqida noaniq. O'z so'rovida u FL
yozish bo'yicha maqolalar FL mutaxassislariga qaratilgan nashrlarda paydo bo'lishini aniqladi
va bu FL yozish tadqiqoti va pedagogikasi bilan shug'ullanuvchilarning ko'pchiligi o'zlarini
yozuvchi o'qituvchi emas, balki birinchi navbatda til o'qituvchisi sifatida ko'rishini ko'rsatdi.
An'anaviy yozuv sinflarida o'quvchilar darsda passiv bo'lganligi sababli, ular tabiiy ravishda
kooperativ o'zaro ta'sir usullaridan o'zlarini noqulay his qiladilar, bu esa ulardan faolroq rol
o'ynashni talab qiladi.
Kalit so'zlar:
fikr-mulohazalarni amalga oshirish, o'rganish, tengdoshlarning fikr-
mulohazalari, tengdoshlarni tekshirish, qayta ko'rib chiqish.
INTRODUCTION
Feedback is an essential part of the teaching process that helps learners to correct mistakes.
First, it provides motivation and guidance for the writer to revise the composition until it is
finished. Second, it strengthens the concept of audience and helps the author to change from a
‘writer-based’ perspective to a ‘reader-based’ one, so as to achieve the purpose of expressing
meaning through writing. The effect of writing feedback can improve learner’ writing skills
and reflect the effectiveness of teachers’ guidance involved. Teacher feedback is dominant in
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing teaching. For teachers, however, providing
feedback for students is “a tedious and unrewarding job” . Large classes in China impose a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 04,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 1339
heavy workload for teachers to correct students’ writing, and no matter how carefully essays
are corrected, the same mistakes continue to occur repeatedly. Consequently, the traditional
method of teacher feedback has been questioned due to its poor effect, whereas the feasibility
of peer feedback has been revealed in the research. believes that peer feedback can be used to
improve students’ initiative in writing. It should also be noted that any teaching method has
its advantages and limitations, which means taking no account of the reality will only lead to
passive teaching without much practical effect.
Peer feedback has risen to be another major feedback method apart from teacher feedback
in English as a Second Language (ESL) writing classes. Theoretically deriving from the
teaching theory of process writing and cooperative learning, especially Vygotsky’s “Zone of
Proximal Development” and “interaction theory of second language acquisition” (Liu &
Hansen, 2002), peer feedback has become an increasingly influential form of feedback in
ESL writing teaching. Peer feedback is a writing teaching activity in which learners exchange
their essays and propose suggestions for revision (Mangelsdorf, 1992) and it is also referred
to as peer review, peer response, peer critiquing, peer evaluation, and peer editing, etc.
Studies have shown that peer feedback can encourage learners to take an active part in
writing (Mendonca & Johnson, 1994), enhance students’ willingness for revision, and create
greater opportunities for learners to interact, negotiate and cooperate which are essential
factors to improve learners’ initiative. In the realm of language learning, writing is a crucial
skill that students must develop to achieve proficiency. Writing not only demonstrates a
learner's understanding of grammar, vocabulary, and syntax but also serves as a means for
learners to express ideas and engage in communicative practices. Traditional methods of
instruction often focus on teacher feedback as the primary means for learners to improve their
writing skills. However, recent educational research has emphasized the value of peer
feedback as an alternative or complementary strategy in the writing process.
Peer feedback refers to the process by which students provide constructive comments on
each other's writing. This collaborative approach has been found to enhance writing skills, as
it encourages learners to critically analyze and reflect on the work of their peers, thus
fostering deeper learning. Peer feedback also offers a platform for students to receive diverse
perspectives, which can provide them with new insights on how to improve their own writing.
This study aims to explore the effect of peer feedback on writing skills in language learning,
investigating its potential benefits, challenges, and how it can contribute to the development
of learners' writing proficiency. By examining various approaches to peer feedback, this
research seeks to better understand its role in fostering self-regulation, increasing motivation,
and enhancing the quality of writing among language learners.
METHODS
This study aims to investigate the effect of peer feedback on the development of writing
skills in language learning[1]. To achieve this, a mixed-methods approach was employed,
combining both quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques to assess changes in
students' writing abilities and their perceptions of peer feedback.
1. Research Design: This study utilizes a pre-test and post-test quasi-experimental design to
compare the writing skills of two groups of students: the experimental group, which engages
in peer feedback, and the control group, which receives traditional teacher feedback. Both
groups complete identical writing tasks before and after the intervention period. 2.
Participants: The study involved 50 intermediate-level language learners enrolled in an
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 04,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 1340
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) course. The participants, aged 18 to 25, were randomly
assigned to either the experimental group (n=25) or the control group (n=25). All participants
had similar levels of prior language proficiency, assessed using a standardized language test,
and were enrolled in a 12-week writing course.
Experimental Group (Peer Feedback): The students in this group participated in peer
feedback sessions after completing writing tasks. During each session, students were paired
up and provided with structured guidelines on how to give constructive feedback. The
feedback was focused on key aspects of writing, including grammar, coherence, vocabulary
usage, and argumentation. Students were encouraged to provide both positive comments and
suggestions for improvement. The peer feedback process was guided by a rubric to ensure the
consistency and quality of the feedback. Control Group (Teacher Feedback): The control
group continued to receive traditional teacher feedback. After completing their writing
assignments, these students submitted their drafts to the instructor, who provided detailed
comments and suggestions for improvement on each student’s writing. Pre-test and Post-test
Writing Tasks: Both groups completed a writing task at the beginning (pre-test) and at the
end (post-test) of the 12-week course.
RESULTS
The writing tasks were designed to assess various aspects of writing proficiency, such as
grammar, vocabulary usage, organization, coherence, and overall clarity. Peer Feedback
Records: In the experimental group, records of peer feedback were collected after each peer
review session. These records included both the feedback provided by the students and the
revisions made based on the feedback. Surveys and Interviews: At the end of the study,
participants completed a survey to evaluate their perceptions of the peer feedback process.
Additionally, a subset of participants (n=10 from each group) were selected for semi-
structured interviews, which aimed to gather in-depth qualitative data on their experiences
with peer feedback and its impact on their writing skills. 5. Data Analysis: Quantitative
Analysis: The pre-test and post-test writing tasks were analyzed using a paired-sample t-test
to determine whether there were significant improvements in writing skills in both the
experimental and control groups. Writing samples were evaluated based on a rubric that
assessed grammar, coherence, vocabulary usage, and organization. Effect sizes were also
calculated to measure the magnitude of changes between the two groups. Qualitative
Analysis: The peer feedback records were analyzed qualitatively to identify common patterns
in the feedback provided by peers. This analysis focused on the types of feedback (e.g.,
content, grammar, clarity) and the level of specificity in the comments. Additionally, survey
responses and interview transcripts were analyzed thematically to explore students’ attitudes
toward peer feedback, their perceived benefits, and any challenges they faced during the peer
review process[2]. Ethical Considerations: Informed consent was obtained from all
participants before the start of the study. Students were assured that their participation was
voluntary and that their identities would remain confidential. All data were anonymized to
protect participants’ privacy.
This mixed-methods approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of the effect of
peer feedback on writing skills, providing both quantitative evidence of improvements in
writing proficiency and qualitative insights into students' experiences and perceptions of the
peer feedback process.
DISCUSSION
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 04,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 1341
This study aimed to explore the effect of peer feedback on writing skills in language
learning, focusing on both the improvements in writing quality and the participants'
perceptions of the peer feedback process. The results revealed that peer feedback can
significantly enhance learners' writing skills, though the impact varied across different
aspects of writing and between individuals. 1. Impact on Writing Skills: The quantitative
analysis of the pre-test and post-test writing tasks showed that both the experimental group
(peer feedback) and the control group (teacher feedback) exhibited improvements in their
writing skills. However, the experimental group demonstrated a greater improvement in areas
such as coherence, vocabulary usage, and overall organization. These findings suggest that
peer feedback can foster more detailed revisions, as students are encouraged to think
critically about the structure and content of their peers' writing. Interestingly, while both
groups showed progress in grammar, the experimental group had more significant gains in
vocabulary and clarity. This may be because peer feedback encourages students to focus not
only on language accuracy but also on meaning and expression, aspects that are often less
emphasized in traditional teacher feedback[3]. Teacher feedback was often more detailed and
targeted, addressing specific errors and providing direct suggestions for improvement. In
contrast, peer feedback tended to be more general, with students sometimes offering broader
comments or focusing on surface-level issues such as spelling and punctuation. This disparity
may have influenced the extent to which peer feedback impacted certain aspects of writing,
particularly grammar and syntax.
Despite these differences, the peer feedback process encouraged greater learner
autonomy. The act of reviewing peers' work allowed students to engage more actively with
the writing process, promoting critical thinking and self-reflection. Peer feedback also created
a more collaborative learning environment, where students could learn from each other's
mistakes and successes. This peer-to-peer interaction has the potential to increase motivation
and boost students’ confidence in their writing abilities.
CONCLUSION
This study has provided valuable insights into the role of peer feedback in enhancing
writing skills among language learners. The findings suggest that peer feedback can
significantly improve various aspects of writing, including coherence, vocabulary usage, and
organization. While both the experimental group (peer feedback) and the control group
(teacher feedback) demonstrated progress in their writing, the experimental group exhibited
more notable improvements in areas related to content and clarity, highlighting the unique
benefits of peer interactions. The peer feedback process not only facilitated improvements in
writing but also encouraged a more collaborative learning environment, where students
learned from each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Students in the experimental group
reported positive experiences with peer feedback, emphasizing the value of giving and
receiving constructive comments. However, challenges such as vague feedback and the
variability in peer proficiency indicate the need for better training and guidance in the peer
review process.
References:
1. Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types
and writing quality. Journal of second language writing, 8(3), 215-241.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80115-5
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 04,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 1342
2. Brannon, L., & Knoblauch, C. H. (1982). On students' rights to their own texts: A model
of teacher response. College composition and communication, 33(2), 157-166.
https://doi.org/10.2307/357623
3. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer
response group interaction. Journal of second language writing, 5(1), 1-19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90012-0
