This presentation discusses the implementation and study of process writing and peer assessment in the context of three courses in teacher education: young adult literature, methodology, and language skills. The primary aim of the study was to learn about the effects of the approach on language and content learning, as well as the trainees’ gains in their pedagogical content knowledge about formative assessment.

1. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
A Lesson Study on Process Writing
and Peer-assessment in Teacher
Education
& Sabine Wallner

2. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• initial teacher education
• 6-semester secondary school programme - EFL
• 5th semester (CEFR level: C1)
• 3 courses: literary analysis (1.5 ECTS)
methodology (1.5 ECTS)
language skills (1.5 ECTS)
• time constraints
• growing number of students, many studying part-time
• paradigm shift in testing and assessment towards
criterion-orientation
Context
2 & Sabine Wallner

3. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• 2 cohorts
• n=65 teacher trainees (n1=36/29, n2=34)
• previous studies: literary analysis of short
stories; testing and assessment for lower
secondary school learners; academic writing at
the transition from B2+ to C1 level
Sample
3 & Sabine Wallner

4. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• content and language integrated learning (CLIL)
• pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) Shulman 1986
• Lesson Study
Dudley 2014; Elliott 2012; Lewis & Hurd 2011; Marton 2015
• time constraints Cochran-Smith & Zeichner 2005; Isaacs & Kolba 2009;
Sikwibele and Mungoo 2009; Scherer 2003; Thomas 2002; Voke 2003
• writing and social media Durant 2011; Hammerberg 2001; Reed
2014; Snyder & Joyce 2003
• pedagogical content and language integrated
learning (P-CLIL) Mewald 2016
P-CLIL via Lesson Study
4 & Sabine Wallner

5. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
language
contentpedagogy content
pedagogy
P-CLIL
via LS
P-CLIL via Lesson Study
& Sabine Wallner5

6. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• good writers vs. weak writers (Beauvais et al. 2011;Durant 2011)
Goal-setting procedures invite writers to direct their attention to
elements that will help them reach their goals, such as number
of ideas to be included in the final text […] or the length of the
finished product … Beauvais et.al, 2011: 421
• feedback (Gillespie & Graham, 2011)
• authenticity (Hedge 2005)
• assessment literacy (Green 2014)
• formative assessment and learning gains (Black & William
1998a, 1998b; Hattie 2012; Pawlak 2014; Tsagari & Banerjee 2014)
Writing
6

7. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
… any teaching method is most useful when
there is plenty of prompt feedback about
whether the student is thinking about a problem
in the right way. [….] Thus teachers must
develop a scoring rubric for any assignment
before they complete the questions or prompts,
and show the rubric to the students so that they
know what the teacher values.
Hattie 2012:88, referring to Willingham 2009
Feedback
7 & Sabine Wallner

8. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• produce a 1000-word comparative literary analysis
• recognise the importance of process writing: outlining,
drafting, redrafting, finalising
• learn to organise process writing in secondary education
• learn to give structured feedback based on a set of criteria
• learn how to receive constructive feedback and to revise
accordingly in professional learning communities
• improve language skills through collaborative process
writing
• improve PCK through giving and receiving critical feedback,
• submit better assignments adapted from Mewald 2016
Lesson Study Goals
8 & Sabine Wallner

9. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Author 1 Author 2
Author 3
Version 1
Lesson Study, trainees
9 & Sabine Wallner

10. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Author 1 Author 2
Author 3
Peer editor 1
Version 1
10
Cycle 1
& Sabine Wallner

11. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Author 1 Author 2
Author 3
Version 2
11 & Sabine Wallner

12. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1 Author 2
Author 3
Peer editor 2
Version 2
12
Cycle 2
& Sabine Wallner

13. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1 Author 2
Author 3
Version 3
13 & Sabine Wallner

14. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1
Author 3
Version 3
Tutor 1
Author 2
Tutor 1
Feedback
 Coherence &
Cohesion
 Linguistic range
 Accuracy
14
Cycle 3

15. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1
Author 3
Version 4
Author 2
15

16. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1
Author 3
Version 4
Tutor 2
Author 2
Tutor 2
Feedback
 Organisation
 Thematic
development
16
Cycle 4

17. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Author 1
Author 3
Version 5 –
ready for
publishing
Author 2
17 & Sabine Wallner

18. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Version 2
Versions 1- 5
Version 5
Tutor 1
Tutor 2Product
Peers
Process
Process
Process
Process
18 & Sabine Wallner

19. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald19
Lesson Study, tutors
2
C
O
H
O
R
T
S
5
C
Y
L
E
S
& Sabine Wallner

20. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Attitudes towards process writing and peer assessment
- collaborative writing has improved argumentative
essays (63%)
- useful approach to develop writing skills (56%)
It was a new experience and I think it was an interesting
method! I worked a lot with the text and you can see it
develop. Online Survey, comment to question 7
- 15% will definitely plan to use process writing in an
age-appropriate way in teaching practice
- 63% foresee a possible implementation in the future
20
Findings
& Sabine Wallner

21. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
It must be a very good class; otherwise it [process
writing] doesn't work - too complicated for some kids.
Online Survey, question 12
I don’t think it’ll be easy, you know, all the time it takes
to get a text done… and, you know, my mentor says I
have to correct every word the pupils write…. This
makes it pretty impossible to do process writing in class.
Group Interview, 01/15, trainee
21
Findings

22. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
lexis grammar register punctuation spelling coherence
cohesion
explicit
feedback
168
55%
189
44%
81
100%
89
75%
171
100%
11
100%
implicit
feedback
119
39%
207
48%
29
25%
clarification
request
20
7%
32
7%
Total 307
28%
428
38%
81
7%
118
11%
171
15%
11
1%
22
Feedback
& Sabine Wallner

23. Version 4 O1 O2 O3 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 C1
mean 3.34 3.59 3.21 3.21 2.52 2.76 2.45 2.97 3.52
4.0 17 22 13 19 7 12 9 12 16
3.0 8 3 10 2 8 3 3 8 12 target goal
2.0 1 3 5 5 9 11 11 6 1
1.0 3 1 1 1 3 1 4 2
0.0 2 2 2 2 1
Versoin 5 O1 O2 O3 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 C1
mean 3.76 3.86 3.66 3.76 3.38 3.52 3.48 3.48 3.62
4.0 22 25 19 23 13 17 16 17 18
3.0 7 4 10 5 14 10 11 9 11 target goal
2.0 1 2 2 2 3
Version 4 C2 C3 C4 C5 L1 L2 L3 A1 A3
mean 3.55 3.24 3.48 3.55 3.14 3.14 3.14 3.00 3.00
4.0 16 13 16 16 9 9 9 5 5
3.0 13 12 11 13 15 15 15 19 19 target goal
2.0 3 2 5 5 5 5 5
1.0 1
Version 5 C2 C3 C4 C5 L1 L2 L3 A1 A3
mean 3.59 3.34 3.59 3.59 3.14 3.14 3.14 2.97 2.97
4.0 17 14 18 17 10 9 9 3 4
3.0 12 11 10 12 14 15 15 22 23 target goal
2.0 4 1 5 5 5 4 2

24. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• good results in essay writing and the development of
PCK in the form of feedback strategies if certain
conditions are met
• trainees’ timetable must be organised in a way that the
phases for process writing, providing feedback, and
editing are long enough
• administrators have to schedule the courses in a
meaningful sequence designed and communicated by
the course tutors
• thesis statements need to be developed and discussed
very early in the process
24
Findings tutors
& Sabine Wallner

25. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• analysis should be considered an emerging phenomenon
once the work on a topic or focus point has started
• literature review has to start early, ideally prior to the
course
• linguistic improvement: coherence & cohesion and
accuracy are key areas that need to be supported
through modelling and collaborative writing in a
conscious approach
• peer feedback and the subsequent editing are quite
successful in language related areas (linguistic range and
accuracy) provided that the peer reviewers are of similar
or higher level
25
Findings tutors
& Sabine Wallner

26. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
• quality of the feedback by peer editors depends on their
own knowledge and skills and their developing PCK
• change peer teams regularly in order to provide trainees
with the opportunity to share the potential group
support equally
• spread proficient editors and communicators of good
feedback among the triads rather than gathering them
in “elite” teams
• danger of accepting feedback without question - need to
check suggested solutions or search for better options in
dictionaries or vocabulary banks (e.g. VOICE, BNC,
English Profile…) or secondary literature
26
Findings tutors

27. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
language
contentpedagogy content
pedagogy
P-CLIL
via LS
P-CLIL via Lesson Study:
a success story
& Sabine Wallner27

28. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Thank you for your attention!
claudia.mewald@ph-noe.ac.at
sabine.wallner@ph-noe.ac.at
28 & Sabine Wallner

29. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Beauvais, Caroline, Olive Thierry, and Jean-Michel Passerault. 2011. "Why Are Some Texts Good and Others Not?
Relationship Between Text Quality and Management of the Writing Process." Journal of Educational Psychology
103(2): 415-428.
Berninger, Virginia W., Frances Fuller, and Diane Whitaker. 1996. "A process model of writing development across
the life span." Educational Psychology Review 8: 193–218.
Black, Paul, and Dylan William. 1998a. "Assessment and classroom learning." Assessment in Education 5: 7-74.
Black, Paul, und Dylan William. 1998b. “Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.“
Phi Delta Kappan 80(2): 139-148.
Cochran-Smith, Marilyn and Kenneth M. Zeichner. 2005. Studying Teacher Education: The Report of the AERA
Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Washington: AERA.
Dudley, P. (2014). Lesson Study: a handbook. Retrieved 07 14, 2016, from lessonstudy.co.uk:
http://lessonstudy.co.uk/lesson-study-a-handbook/
Durant, Richard. 2011. Less good writing. A playful, practical manual for improving writing across the curriculum.
Sowton: Devon Learning and Development Partnership.
Elliott, J. (2012). Developing a science of teaching through lesson study. International Journal for Lesson and
Learning Studies, 1(2), 108-125.
Gillespie, Amy, and Steve Graham. 2011. "Evidence-based practices for teaching writing." Better: Evidence-based
Education Magazine. http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/Better/articles/Winter2011.html (accessed 1 21,
2015).
Green, Anthony. 2014. Exploring Language Assessment and Testing. Language in Action. New York: Routledge.
29
Bibliography
& Sabine Wallner

30. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Hammerberg, Dawnene D. 2001. “Reading and Writing “Hypertextually”: Children’s Literature, Technology, and
Early Writing Instruction.” Language Arts: 207-216.
Hattie, John. 2012. Visible Learning for Teachers. Maximising Impact on Learning. New York: Routledge.
Hedge, Tricia. 2005. Writing. New York: OUP.
Isaacs, Emily, and Ellen Kolba. 2009. “Mutual Benefits: Pre-Service Teachers and Public School Students in the
Writing Center.” The Writing Center Journal: 52-74.
Kellogg, Ronald T. 1987. The psychology of writing. New York: OUP.
Livingstone, Sonia. 2007. “Media literacy and the challenge of new information and communication
technologies.” London: LSE. Accessed: 15. 05. 2015.
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/1017/1/MEDIALITERACY.pdf
Lewis, M. (1993) The Lexical Approach. London, Language Teaching Publications.
Lewis, C. C., & Hurd, J. (2011). Lesson Study. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation Theory and the Improvement of Teaching. Göteborg: Gothenburg Studies in
Educational Sciences 323.
Marton, F. (2015). Necessary Conditions of Learning. New York: Routledge.
McCutchen, Deborah. 1988. “Functional automaticity in children’s writing: A problem of metacognitive control.“
Written Communication 5: 306–324.
Pawlak, Mirosław. 2014. Error Correction in the Foreign Language Classroom. Reconsidering the Issues.
Heidelberg: Springer.
30
Bibliography
& Sabine Wallner

31. PÄDAGOGISCHE
HOCHSCHULE
NIEDERÖSTERREICHfür
www.ph-noe.ac.at© Claudia Mewald
Reed, Jon. 2014. “How social media is changing language.” OxfordWords Blog. Accessed: 15. 05. 2015.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2014/06/social-media-changing-language/
Scherer, Marge. 2003. Keeping Good Teachers. Nashville: ASCD.
Shaw, Stuart D., and Cyril J. Weir. 2007. Examining Writing: Research and practice in assessing second language
writing. Studies. Studies in Language Testing 26. Cambridge: UCLES/ CUP.
Shulman, Lee S. 1986. "Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching." Educational Researcher: 4-31.
Sikwibele, Anne L. and Judith K. Mungoo. 2009. “Distance Learning and Teacher Education in Botswana:
Opportunities and Challenges.” The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Accessed:
15. 05. 2015.
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/rt/printerFriendly/706/1325
Snyder, Ilana. 2003. Page to Screen: Taking Literacy Into the Electronic Era. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis
Group.
Thomas, Elwyn. 2002. Teacher Education: Dilemmas and Prospects. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Tickle, Les. 2000. Teacher induction. The way ahead. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Tsagari, Dina, and Jayanti Banerjee. 2014. "Language Assessment in the Educational Context." In Handbook of
Educational Linguistics, by Martha Bigelow and Johanna Ennser-Kananen, 339-352. New York: Routledge/Taylor
& Francis Group.
Voke, Heather. 2003. “Understanding and Responding to the Teacher Shortage.” In Keeping Good Teachers, by
Marge Scherer, 3-13. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Willingham, Dan T. 2009. Why don't students like school? A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the
mind works and what it means for the classroom. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
31
Bibliography
& Sabine Wallner