The document summarizes a presentation given by Professor David Carless on the potentials and challenges of peer feedback in second language writing. Some key points discussed include: (1) peer feedback can benefit students both when giving and receiving feedback, (2) training and support from teachers is important for effective peer feedback implementation, and (3) challenges include students not taking peer feedback seriously and providing low-quality feedback without proper guidance. The presentation emphasizes the role of teacher communication, modeling, and coaching to help students engage meaningfully with peer feedback processes.

1. Peer feedback in second
language writing: potentials
and challenges
Professor David Carless,
Taipei, March 17, 2018
The University of Hong Kong

2. The University of Hong KongThe University of Hong Kong

3. Overview
1. Feedback processes
2. Peer feedback rationales
3. Our recent research
4. Challenges & Implications
The University of Hong Kong

4. Aim of talk
To discuss key issues for effective
implementation of peer feedback
The University of Hong Kong

5. Dual processes
Composing
&
receiving
peer
feedback
The University of Hong Kong

6. SITUATING FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

7. The University of Hong Kong
Productive assessment
task design
Appreciating what quality
looks like
Student engagement
with feedback
Learning-oriented assessment framework
(Carless, 2015a)

8. Dialogic feedback
Feedback needs to generate dialogue
The University of Hong Kong

9. Key aim of feedback
To enhance student
ability to self-monitor
their work in
progress
The University of Hong Kong

10. Sustainable feedback
Students generating & using feedback from
peers, self (or teachers) as part of self-
regulated learning (Carless et al., 2011)
The University of Hong Kong

11. Student feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong
Making
Judgments
Appreciating
Feedback
Managing
Affect
Taking Action
(Carless & Boud, 2018)

12. INTRODUCING
PEER FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

13. The University of Hong Kong

14. Defining peer feedback (PF)
“A communication process through which
learners enter into dialogues related to
performance & standards” (Liu & Carless,
2006, p. 280)
peer response (Liu & Hansen, 2002)
The University of Hong Kong

15. A key point
Learners often gain more from composing
PF than from receiving it
(Lundstrom & Baker, 2009; Yu & Lee, 2015)
The University of Hong Kong

16. RATIONALE FOR PEER
FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

17. Key Rationales
Involve students in dialogue
around the quality of work
Inform student self-evaluation
Potentially timely &
sustainable
The University of Hong Kong

18. Technology-enabled PF
LMS
PeerMark
Web 2.0
The University of Hong Kong

19. THREE KEY STUDIES
The University of Hong Kong

20. The University of Hong Kong

21. To give is better than to receive
Students taught to give PF, improved writing
more than students taught to use PF
Explanation: You review in your own ZPD
but may not receive in your ZPD
(Lundstrom & Baker, 2009)
The University of Hong Kong

22. The University of Hong Kong

23. Varying response to PF
Not all students buy in to PF
Gains from reading others’ texts
Passive involvement
(Yu & Lee, 2015)
The University of Hong Kong

24. The University of Hong Kong

25. Students need training
1. Used sample essay to model feedback
2. Implemented two cycles of peer feedback
3. Coached students in improving peer
feedback
The University of Hong Kong

26. OUR RECENT RESEARCH
(Zhu & Carless, 2018)
The University of Hong Kong

27. Qiyun Zhu (Judy)
The University of Hong Kong

28. Context
Year 1 university EFL class
200 students, 5 teachers
Peer review of writing
Sustained observations, interviews
The University of Hong Kong

29. Preparation
No or minimal training
PF sheet / guiding questions
The University of Hong Kong

30. Selected positive findings
• Written peer feedback then
oral dialogue
• Timeliness, immediacy,
negotiation
The University of Hong Kong

31. Selected negative findings
• Partner not enthusiastic, perfunctory
• Comments were vague & general
• Teacher should provide more training and
support
The University of Hong Kong

32. Implications
Importance of dialogue between peers
Role of teacher to model
& coach
The University of Hong Kong

33. PEER FEEDBACK CHALLENGES
The University of Hong Kong

34. Main challenges
• Students don’t take it seriously
• Poor quality PF
• Students prefer teacher feedback
• Lack of teacher assessment &
feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong

35. Implications
The University of Hong Kong

36. Communication
Rationales
The University of Hong Kong
Potential benefits
Processes
Tackling challenges

37. The role of trust
Feedback is a social and relational act:
Importance of trust
The University of Hong Kong

38. Recommended PF practice
• Sell rationale & benefits to students
• Communicate gains for ‘giver’
• Provide training, modeling & support
• Encourage collaborative climate
The University of Hong Kong

40. References
Carless, D. (2015a). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6), 963-976.
Carless, D. (2015b). Excellence in University Assessment: learning from award-winning teachers. London:
Routledge.
Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback.
Manuscript under review.
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher
Education, 36 (4) 395-407.
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Michigan: University of
Michigan Press.
Liu, N.F. & Carless, D. (2006) Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment, Teaching in Higher Education,
11 (3), 279-290.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, K. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s
own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.
Min, H.-T. (2006). The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students’ Revision Types and Writing Quality. Journal
of Second Language Writing 15 (2): 118-141.
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ participation in group peer feedback of L2 writing: A case study
from an activity theory perspective. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 572-593.
Zhu, Q. & Carless, D. (2018). Dialogue within peer feedback processes: Clarification and negotiation of meaning.
Higher Education Research & Development https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417
The University of Hong Kong

41. QUESTIONS
COMMENTS
The University of Hong Kong