Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 168, 2023
2023 International Conference on Language, Innovative Education and Cultural Communication (CLEC 2023)
Article Number 01005
Number of page(s) 5
Section Language Curriculum Analysis and Educational Innovation
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202316801005
Published online 18 May 2023
  1. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Yu Hong. (2020). An Empirical Study on the Effect of Teacher Feedback + peer review on English Students' Essays. English Abroad (20), 31–33. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kostopoulou, S., & O’Dwyer, F. (2021). “We learn from each other”: peer review writing practices in English for Academic Purposes. Language Learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 67–91. [Google Scholar]
  4. Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Heinemann Educational Books, 4 Front St., Exeter, NH 03833. [Google Scholar]
  5. Topping, K. J. (2010). Peers as a source of formative assessment. In Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 61–74). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ahmed, R. (2021). Peer review in academic writing: Different perspectives from instructors and students. Tesol Journal, 12(1), e00537. [Google Scholar]
  7. Zhou Jiming, & Shu Dingfang. (2019). Teacher Practice and Student Cognitive Interaction in peer review. Foreign Languages, (5), 64–71. [Google Scholar]
  8. Wang, W. (2014). Students’ perceptions of rubric- referenced peer review on EFL writing: A longitudinal inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19, 80–96. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Liu Xinghua, Ji Xiaoling, & Yu Jiying. (2017). Promoting Learning with Evaluation: Construction of Effective peer review Model in College English Writing and Its Effect on Promoting Learning. Contemporary Foreign Language Studies, 17(05), 9. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  11. Mason, J. (2017). Qualitative researching. Sage. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wray, A., Trott, K., & Bloomer, A. (1998). Projects in linguistics: A practical guide to researching language. Arnold. [Google Scholar]
  13. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77–101. [Google Scholar]
  14. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kalekin-Fishman, D. (2001, September). david silverman (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 2, No. 3). [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen Xiangming. (2000). Qualitative Research Methods and Social Science Research (Vol. 89). Beijing: Educational Science Press. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ma Xiaomei, Shi Xiaoting, Lu Chang, & Li Rong. (2022). Development and validation of English writing peer review scale based on classroom assessment. Journal of Xi'an University of International Chinese. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhou Yishu. (2013). A Comparative Study of College English Writing Feedback Methods. Foreign Languages, (3), 87–96. [Google Scholar]
  19. Vuogan, A., & Li, S. (2022). Examining the Effectiveness of peer review in Second Language Writing: A Meta-Analysis. TESOL Quarterly. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.