Peer-editing versus self-editing in the ESL classroom

Abstract

Few studies have compared peer-editing to self-editing with respect to writing development. This study addresses this gap in literature. It uses a pre-test/post-test comparison group quasi-experimental design and employs quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection to compare the effect of trained peer-editing to that of trained self-editing in developing students' writing in revised drafts. The student sample comprised students taking a freshman level course at an American university in Lebanon. The comparison group engaged in self-editing their essays, while the experimental group practiced peer-editing. The researcher, who was also the instructor, evaluated students' writing performance using a rubric following the multiple trait approach and another rater evaluated a sample of students' essays to achieve inter-rater reliability. A comparison of ANCOVA tests from both groups revealed that unlike the comparison group, the experimental group significantly improved their revised drafts. Sample essays and editing forms by the experimental and control groups were also analyzed to determine the changes made to students' second drafts in response to peer- and self-feedback. The study concludes by recommending the use of peer-editing in the writing classroom since it focuses students' attention on good writing skills and helps them construct new knowledge through peer mediation.