www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Developing Business Management Students' Persuasive Writing
Through Blog-based Peer-Feedback
Osama H. Sayed
Intensive English Program, Community College in Bisha, King Khalid University
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Bisha, Postcode: 61922, PO Box: 1113
E-mail: u_zedan555@yahoo.com
Abstract
The present study attempted to investigate the effect of using blog-based peer feedback on the persuasive writing
of EFL business management students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia.
The study used a pre-test/post-test experimental and control group design. An experimental group and a control
group were exposed to pre-post means of getting data (a pre-post test of persuasive writing). Results of the
analysis of the differences between means of scores of the study subjects in the pre-post-measurements revealed
a significant improvement in the experimental group students' persuasive writing.
Keywords: Persuasive Writing, Weblog, Peer feedback
1. Introduction and background
With the astonishing advances in communications, brought about mainly by computer and internet, good writing
skills have become more and more, essential for communication in both academic and real life. According to
Olshtain (2001, p. 206), "the skill of writing enjoys special status-it is via writing that a person can communicate
a variety of messages to a close or distant, known or unknown reader or readers. Such communication is
extremely important in the modern world, whether the interaction takes the form of traditional paper-and-pencil
writing or the most technologically advanced electronic mail". For Graham & Perin (2007, p. 3), "writing well is
not just an option for young people—it is a necessity. Along with reading comprehension, writing skill is a
predictor of academic success and a basic requirement for participation in civic life and in the global economy".
Lin & Chien (2009, p. 79) put it clearly that "free writing, at the beginning of our second millennium, is one of
the primary methods that human beings use to convey their thoughts and communicate with each other".
However, writing is not a simple process, even in the mother language, and it is very challenging for almost all
students. According to Celce-Murcia & Olshtain (2000, p. 141), even "a skilled writer, who writes often and for
a variety of purposes, does not necessarily find the writing process easy. Many such writers report on the
difficulties they encounter in sitting down to initiate a writing task or to carry out the final reformation of
something that has already been written in draft form". For Miranda (2003, p. 3) "writing is not easy to acquire.
People write less than they speak, even in their first language, which in turn leads to fewer opportunities to
practice". Justifying the same difficulty, Brickman (1992, pp. 5-6), claims that "the preoccupation of ESL writers
with writing error-free papers either paralyzes them or causes them sacrifice valuable ideas because they are
afraid to write". According to the American alliance for excellent education (AFEE) report, the 2002 National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in writing shows that very large numbers of adolescents need
interventions to help them become better writers (AFEE, 2006, p. 2).
For business professionals, the need to write clearly, quickly and convincingly has never been more essential
than in today's exceedingly competitive, technology-driven global economy. They are most likely to write in the
genre of persuasive writing. They need to write business proposals, reports, letters, e-mails and briefings that
persuade both individuals and groups of readers, n a recent survey of accounting professionals, a national sample
of certified public accountant (CPA) firms was asked to rate nineteen professional skills on their importance and
the perceived effectiveness of business curricula in developing these skills, writing skills ranked third in
importance, out of nineteen (Ulrich et al., 2003). In another national survey of accounting professionals to
determine the relative importance of 32 business communication skills needed by newly hired accounting
graduates, seven of the top-ten skills were related to writing (Christensen et al., 2004).
Unfortunately, writing, as Jack (2009) states, has been seen as a soft skill that would be nice to improve, not
worth the time or money to invest in training. Most companies tend to invest in training for sales, project
management, budgeting, or other skills that are easier to link to the bottom line, neglecting the reality that poor
writing equals low productivity. Actually, poorly written and unconvincing documents can cause employees to
reread instructions, perform tasks incorrectly, and miscommunicate with their customers. On the other hand,
employees who possess superior writing skills help their organizations achieve their goals, create high customer
satisfaction levels, and lower the business communication-related costs.
54
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Reviewing features of the Web 2.0 era, it is found that blogging is the best-received feature. Blogs or weblogs
have many advantages for all users over other internet tools. They are easy and quick to create; readers can often
respond through a “comments” feature, no knowledge of HTML is needed, easily linked and crosslinked to other
websites to create larger on-line communities and above all, they can be free or very low-cost to create.
In the educational setting in general, and in language teaching and learning in particular, blogs have become
extremely popular owing to their multi merits. According to Fellner & Apple (2006), using Blogs in EFL/ESL
teaching and learning meets seven criteria of task appropriateness; blogs provide students with real learning
opportunities and they fit with students’ interests and varying English levels. Blogs also meet a third criterion,
meaning, as the students are responsible for making sure to write their blog entries clearly enough for their
classmates to understand. In addition, blogs provide both students and teachers with authentic tasks. The fifth
criterion, which is impact, is also met, as the blogs provide students not only with opportunities to acquire and
use new vocabulary but also with new and useful computer skills. Blogging meets the criterion of practicality’ in
that it imposes no extra financial burden on either the university or the students. Finally, blogs met the criterion
of enhancement in that they are much more practical to use than paper-based diaries. For Wu (2006), using blogs
in TEFL has tremendous advantages to both EFL teachers and students; they have the potential to be a truly
transformational technology in that they provide a teaching and learning stage where students enjoy a high level
of independence and good opportunities for greater interaction with peers and the teacher conducts his teaching
with high efficiency.
In contrast to traditional classroom settings, blogs can be very effective in many ways. First, helping students to
communicate and collaborate with each other in the target language outside the confines of the classroom.
Second, having the freedom to choose where and when they want to work. Third, expressing their thoughts at
their own pace and in their own space. Fourth, supporting cooperative and autonomous learning. Fifth,
encouraging ownership and responsibility on the part of students through self-publishing (Godwin-Jones, 2003;
Edwards & Mehring, 2005; Anderson, 2006; Jones, 2006; Mynard, 2007; Sun, 2009).
The adoption of competency-based learning and engaging students in active learning by completing authentic
assignments resulted in an exponential increase in teachers' workloads. At the same time, it is commonly agreed
upon that, providing students with frequent and detailed feedback on their work is something essential for the
process of learning. Unfortunately, the increase in teachers' workloads together with the large numbers of
students imposed additional, and sometimes unmanageable, administrative burden on the teachers (Mulder &
Pearce, 2007). This, in turn, has led to a situation where students simply do not get feedback on many or even
most of their assignments and if there is any, it is often scanty and arrives too late for the students to revise the
assignments before turning them in.
In this respect, many researchers stress the potential benefits of using peer feedback for EFL/ESL writers, as well
as, writing teachers. According to Lundstrom (2006), peer feedback for second language learners provides
students with the opportunity to use language in a meaningful way. For Lin & Chien (2009, p. 79), “when
students are authorized to take on the role of the editor for their peer’s papers to carry out the correction process,
they seem to be more confident and motivation-stimulated in their writing courses”. While feedback from other
students may not be as authoritative as from an expert teacher, it is available in greater volume and with greater
immediacy (De Voider et al., 2007).
However, class time is always limited for giving and taking feedback among students and some students,
especially the shy or the less confident ones, avoid giving critical feedback before their colleagues inside the
classroom. To overcome these problems, Hall (2006) claims that weblogs are the primary vehicle for students to
reflect and give each other feedback on what was presented in class. Supporting this claim, Doris (2009) declares
that weblogs are potentially valuable tools for peer-feedback. Ertmer et al. (2007), state that despite students'
preferences for instructor feedback, online peer feedback is very valuable and, more importantly, online peer
feedback not only reinforces students' learning but enables them to achieve higher understanding. Ernst (2005)
puts it clearly that being engaged in a non-threatening environment in weblogs, EFL/ESL students have the
opportunity to explore many challenging topics. They also are encouraged to take risks without primarily
focusing on grammatical form. According to Sun (2009), by reducing social-context clues such as gender, race,
and status, and nonverbal cues such as facial expressions and body language, computer-mediated communication
(CMC) provides a safer and a more relaxed environment for language learners.
2. Context of the problem
As can be understood, blogs have become very popular in the past few years. They have been supported more
and more as a medium of teaching and learning, not only for native speakers, but for EFL/ESL learners as well.
At the same time, the researcher, as an EFL instructor, noticed that business management students at the
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
55
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
community college in Bisha, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia, where he works, suffer from poor writing
skills. When they are asked to write a letter or a business proposal for example, during the writing class, their
writing is often poor and unconvincing and lacks the needed persuasive techniques. In an attempt to solve this
problem, the present study tries to investigate the effect of using blog-based peer feedback on students'
persuasive writing.
3. Statement of the problem
Business management students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia, suffer
from poor persuasive writing skills. Hence, the present study is an attempt to investigate the effect of using
blog-based peer feedback on their persuasive writing. More specifically, the study attempts to answer the
following question:
3.1 What is the effect of using blog-based peer feedback on the persuasive writing of EFL business management
students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University’, Saudi Arabia?
4. Hypotheses of the study
The researcher hypothesizes the following:
4.1 There is no statistically significant difference between the mean scores obtained by students of the
experimental group and those of the control group in the pre-test ofpersuasive writing.
4.2 There is a statistically significant difference favoring the experimental group between the mean scores
obtained by students of the experimental group and those of the control group in the post-test of persuasive
writing.
5. Literature review
In this review of literature, a discussion of the available previous research related to three main topics is
presented; face-to-face peer feedback in language teaching and learning, online peer feedback in language
teaching and learning, and using weblogs in language teaching and learning.
5 .1 Face-to-face peer-feedback in language learning
In language teaching, in general, and in the teaching of writing in particular, face-to-face peer-feedback, in
which students exchange their work and comment on each other has been shown to be valuable. Peer review is
not a new educational practice. The most important of the merits of peer learning is that it offers the opportunity
for students to learn from each other and it provides a learning experience that is qualitatively different from the
usual teacher-student interactions (Saunders, 2005). It also plays an important role in motivating students as it
informs them about the degree of their learning and it enables them to distinguish between accepted and
unaccepted forms of communication in the target language (Alavi & Kaivanpanah, 2007).
The potential role of face-to-face peer-feedback in teaching and learning in secondary, as well as, higher
education has been examined and discussed extensively in literature. Gielen et al. (2010) examined whether peer
feedback can be a substitute for teacher feedback and which measures can be taken to improve its effectiveness.
Results revealed that there is no significant difference between peer feedback and teacher feedback; both are of
the same importance for the development of students' writing skills. The study of Lin & Chien (2009) focused on
investigating effectiveness of peer feedback on the writing of English majors from communal, cognitive,
cooperative and pedagogical perspectives. Results indicated that most participants believed that peer feedback
positively assisted their learning in English writing. Lundstrom 's (2006) study attempted to investigate the
benefits of peer review to the reviewer, or the student giving the feedback, in the field of second language
writing; which is more beneficial to improving student writing: receiving or giving peer feedback. Results
showed that the treatment groups, which focused solely on reviewing peers’ writing, made more significant gains
in their writing than the control groups.
5.2 Online peer-feedback in language learning
With the growing interest in online learning in general, there is an equivalent growing interest in various forms
of online assessment and feedback. Compared to face-to-face oral or written, online peer-feedback proved to
have many advantages. Rourke et al. (2008) conducted two case studies, which showcase two approaches to
using peer review to teach coursework masters students how to write a research paper in arts administration; the
first case study used the anonymous and random online calibrated peer review (CPR) while the second used
computer mediated peer review (CMPR) within the discussion forum. Results indicated that online peer review
is a useful tool for assisting students towards writing a successful research paper, particularly when students are
provided with specified assessment criteria, grade-ranking system and set deadlines. It helps them to take
responsibility for their own learning process, to value the opinions of others, and to improve their time
56
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
management as they work collaboratively towards a common goal. Ware & O'Dowd (2008) explored the impact
of online peer feedback on language development among English and Spanish learners in weekly asynchronous
discussions. Pedagogical implications of this study included the need to situate peer feedback on form within
current models of telecollaboration and to assist students in using feedback strategies. In an exploratory study,
Ertmer et al. (2007) examined the use of an innovative instructional approach for online learning peer feedback.
This study examined students’ perceptions of the perceived value of giving and receiving peer feedback,
specifically related to the quality of discussion postings, in an online course. Results indicated that despite
students’ preferences for instructor feedback, the quality of students’ postings was maintained through the use of
online peer feedback.
Guardado & Shi (2007) reported an exploratory study of English as a second language (ESL) students’
experiences of online peer feedback. The study showed that online peer feedback, while eliminating the
logistical problems of carrying papers around, retains some of the best features of traditional written feedback,
including a text-only environment that pushes students to write balanced comments with an awareness of the
audience’s needs and with an anonymity that allows peers to make critical comments on each other’s writings.
An intervention of face-to-face class discussion with teacher’s guidance to clarify comments in question is
suggested to maximize the effect of online peer feedback. Ho & Savignon (2007) examined the use of
face-to-face peer review and computer mediated peer review in an EFL academic writing context. Responses to
the Likert-scale items suggested that although learners accepted both peer review modes, they had more
favorable attitudes toward face-to-face peer review than computer-mediated peer review.
The purpose of Lu & Bol's (2007) experiment was to compare the effects of anonymous and identifiable
electronic peer review on college student writing performance and the extent of critical peer feedback. Results
showed that students participating in anonymous e-peer review performed better on the writing performance task
and provided more critical feedback to their peers than did students participating in the identifiable e-peer review.
Mulder & Pearce's (2007) study reported on an initial trial in which they administered peer review using PRAZE
- an online system -that allows the distribution and anonymous exchange of work between students in an
educational setting to be automated. Surveys indicated that the opportunity to participate and benefit from peer
review was broadly appreciated by students.
Wu’s (2006) study investigated EFL adult learners' reactions to peer review and teacher feedback in composition
class. Both the peer review and teacher feedback were given and transmitted via the web to learners' blog. While
teacher feedback appeared to lead to both positive and negative revisions, depending on learners' attitudes and
English proficiency, a significant proportion of the peer review did not serve a linguistic function to give
meaningful and constructive comments but serve a pragmatic function to give complimentary praise or blessings.
In their experimental study, (Bauer & Figl, 2006) explored the quality and kind of feedback given in a
peer-reviewing task. The study analyzed the differences between the face-to-face and the online setting. Results
showed that students commented on fewer topics in the online version but described them in more detail than in
the paper version. In addition, the online version was experienced as time-efficient and easy to fill out, while
students found it significantly easier to express feedback in the paper version.
5.3 Using weblogs in language teaching and learning
In a very recent descriptive study, Ennis & Gambrell (2010) concluded that there is no difference in the
utilization of weblog and podcast technology for school related purposes between faculty and millennial students
in a selected teacher education department, and that weblogs and podcasts enhance learning experience. Sun's
(2009) study aimed at verifying the argument that extensive practice on blogs can constitute an integral part of
instruction, and that blogs enable students to structure their thoughts. This study used voice blogs as a platform
for an extensive study of language learners’ speaking skills. Results revealed that students (a) developed a series
of blogging stages, including conceptualizing, brainstorming, articulation, monitoring, and evaluating, and used
a wide variety of strategies to cope with blogging-related difficulties, and (b) perceived blogging as a means of
learning, self-presentation, information exchange, and social networking. Findings also suggest that blogs can
constitute a dynamic forum that fosters extensive practice, learning motivation, authorship, and development of
learning strategies. Namvar et al.'s (2009) study aimed at studying the effect of web- based learning (weblog) by
problem solving approach on English Literature student's reflective thinking. Data analysis showed that
weblog based learning positively affected the development of student's reflective thinking.
Doris's (2009) study investigated the extent to which blogs can facilitate peer feedback in an advanced German
language class. Results indicated that blogs are potentially valuable tools for peer feedback, but entail the need to
address specific issues regarding the choice of CMC tool for feedback tasks, training in the use of interactive
online tools and the roles of teachers and students.
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
57
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Mynard's (2007) study draws on data collected from female college students who kept voluntary blogs in their
free time throughout a semester they spent studying English in the UK. The findings suggested that blogs could
be one tool for educators to use in order to encourage students to reflect on their learning. The purpose of Jones's
(2006) study was to introduce blogging into a community college ESL writing class and to examine the
significance of its use for the process writing approach. Results came congruent with previous research on
technology and second language writing. Blogging proved to be an effective tool for the writing process
approach as evidenced by the numerous benefits for its use that outweighed the drawbacks. Blogging facilitated
the students’ critical thinking skills; affected the quality of students’ writing; provided examples of feedback and
entries for the students to read, model, and from which to learn; facilitated meaningful learning for students;
gave students a purpose for writing; and motivated students’ writing and interaction by publishing for an
authentic audience.
Fellner & Apple (2006) utilized student blogs in an integrated CALL program for low proficiency, low
motivation university language learners. Learner gains in writing fluency were described by comparing the
number of words and word frequency levels in student blogs at the beginning and at the end of the program.
Results indicated that blog-based learning positively affected students' writing fluency.
In a phenomenological study, Xie and Sharma (2004) interviewed nine doctoral students who maintained
Weblogs in a graduate course. Initial data analysis indicated that participants found Weblogs helpful for learning,
reflecting, and building a sense of community. However, participants expressed concerns over the lack of
structure for Weblog usage and the public nature of the reflective process.
6. Method and procedures
6.1 Participants:
Twenty-seven EFL business management students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University,
Saudi Arabia, volunteered to participate in this study. Students shared some common characteristics as they are
all of average ages ranging from 18 to 20 years old, from the same Saudi culture, and with homogeneous English
learning backgrounds. All students had personal computers or laptops and they had access to internet. In addition,
all of them were skilled at using computer and navigating the internet. After excluding drop out the number of
the students who successfully completed the experiment was 20 students. They were randomly assigned, either
to experimental or to control group.
6.2 Experimental design
The study used a pre-test/post-test experimental and control group design. An experimental group and a control
group were exposed to pre-post means of getting data (a pre-post test of persuasive writing). The experimental
group practiced persuasive writing giving and receiving peer feedback through a class blog, while the control
group practiced persuasive writing giving and receiving face-to-face peer feedback among all members of the
group inside the classroom.
6.3 Tools of the study
In order to achieve the objective of the present study, the following tool was prepared by the researcher;
6.3.1 Pre-post persuasive writing test (see appendix 1)
6.3.1.1 Objective of the test
Based on the main objective of the study, the present test aimed at measuring the persuasive writing skills among
EFL business management students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia.
6.3.1.2 Construction of the test
This test was of the essay type. The test in its final form consisted of two writing prompts; one for the pretest and
the other for the posttest. For each prompt, subjects were asked to write a five-paragraph essay.
6.3.1.3 Scoring
The researcher developed a 5-point scoring rubric for scoring this test (see appendix 2). Five main areas were
specified to be measured through this rubric. Each area represented a main criteria of persuasive writing; the first
area was about statement of position, the second was about reasons supporting the stated position, the third was
about anticipating opposing viewpoints or reasons against that position, the fourth was about writing
organization and the fifth was about writing conventions.
6.3.1.1 Nature of the scoring system
Two raters scored each student’s paper. Raters independently rated the student's writing on five criteria of
persuasive writing. These criteria of persuasive writing should be present in the student's writing. They are;
58
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
statement of position, reasons supporting the stated position, anticipating opposing viewpoints or reasons against
that position, writing organization, and writing conventions. Thus, a student's final score on this test was the
mean score given by the two raters. The scoring system was analytic. Analytic scoring simply means that more
than one area of a paper is evaluated. Each area itself was scored holistically. The score assigned expresses the
test rater’s overall impression of the student’s command of the components of each area.
6.3.1.2 The score scale
The score scale is a five-point scale. Each one of the five specified areas of persuasive writing is evaluated
separately and assigned a score of "0"(lowest), "1," "2," "3," or "4"(highest). The scale is a continuum
representing a range of quality. Each score point on the continuum is defined by area-specific scoring guidelines.
Thus, the test maximum score of the test was 20 marks.
6.3.1.3 Area-specific scoring guidelines
6.3.1.3.1 Area (I): statement of position;
The student takes a position or makes a claim and explains why it is debatable or argumentative. (Weight = 4)
6.3.1.3.2 Area (II): reasons supporting the stated position;
The student provides clear, accurate, strong and sufficient reasons to support his position or his claim. (Weight =
4)
6.3.1.3.3 Area (III): anticipating opposing viewpoints or reasons against that position;
The student anticipates opposing viewpoints or reasons against his claim or his position and he addresses them
successfully and thoroughly. (Weight = 4)
6.3.1.3.4 Area (IV): writing organization;
The student's writing is clearly developed and well organized; it has a convincing opening, strong informative
body and satisfying conclusion. Paragraph format is appropriate. (Weight = 4)
6.3.1.3.5 Area (V): writing conventions;
The student's writing exhibits no grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. It consistently, exhibits variety in
sentence structure and accuracy in word choice. (Weight = 4)
6.3.1.4 Test validity
To decide content and face validity, four persuasive writing prompts and a 5-point scoring rubric were prepared
by the researcher and shown to a panel of TEFL experts. After revising the test according to the comments of the
experts, the final form consisted of two writing prompts; one for the pretest and the other for the posttest. Thus,
the test was approved as a valid and appropriate tool for measuring business management students' persuasive
writing.
6.3.1.5 Test reliability
Two different ways were used to calculate the reliability of the present test;
6.3.1.5.1 Reliability of the tool
The reliability of this test was estimated by administering it to a piloting group of business management students,
in two separate sessions (a test re-test method). After that, a coefficient of stability was decided on by calculating
the correlation between the students' scores on the two administrations using Pearson product moment
correlation formula. The reliability of this test was found (r = .80) which is considered a sound value for such
tests.
6.3.1.5.2 Inter-rater reliability
The reliability of this test was also estimated by administering it to the same piloting group. The researcher and
another trained rater of his TEFL colleagues rated the writings of the pilot group students on the test scoring
rubric. Correlation between scores of the researcher and his colleague was calculated. The reliability coefficient
for the persuasive writing test was found (r = 87). This value indicates that this persuasive writing test is
reasonably reliable.
6.3.1.6 Test duration
The duration of this test was calculated while administering it to the pilot group for estimating its reliability. The
average time for finishing this test was found to be (30) minutes. Accordingly, (30) minutes were decided on to
be the optimum time for finishing this test.
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
59
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
6.4 Pre-testing
On 1 st February, 2010, before starting the treatment, the persuasive writing test was administered, as a pretest, to
level two business management students, the participants of the this study, in order to pre-assess their persuasive
writing skills. The test was administered inside the classroom, during a regular writing class, under the direct
supervision of the researcher.
6.5 Treatment
A week prior to the treatment, in two 50-minute sessions, students of the two groups were reminded of the
particular format followed in writing a persuasive essay. They were given a handout of the persuasive writing
scoring rubric used in this study, and they were given detailed oral instructions on how it is used in evaluating
their essays. They were also informed that this rubric is useful and helpful for them, as knowing what makes an
essay strong before the student begins writing will help him produce a better overall essay. In addition, students
were given a handout of the peer feedback worksheet, used in the treatment, and they were instructed and trained
on how to use it in giving feedback and comment on their peers' writings.
The treatment was conducted from 2 nd February to 29 th March 2010, two 50-minute sessions per week, with
students of the control group (n=10) giving and receiving feedback inside the classroom among group members,
and the experimental group (n=10) giving and receiving feedback through a class blog. Eight persuasive writing
prompts were worked upon throughout the eight weeks of the treatment; one assignment per week.
In order to guarantee that every student in both groups has the opportunity to give and take feedback from as
many different peers as possible, during the eight weeks of the treatment, students in each group were given
numbers from one to ten, and they were paired as shown in table (1).
According to the setting shown in table (1), each student was allowed to give and take feedback from at least
three different peers (one at a time). For example, student no. 1, in both groups, was paired with students 2, 6,
and 10 of his group; and student no. 7, in both groups, was paired with students 2, 4, 6, and 8 of his group .. .etc.
Students in the control group were given a handout of the persuasive essay-writing prompt of the week. They
were given one session every week for writing and the following session was devoted to face-to-face peer
feedback in which they exchange drafts for feedback and comment. They were provided with a printed peer
feedback worksheet and they were asked to read their peers' essays, and then give their feedbacks on their peers'
writings by giving thoughtful and thorough responses to the questions on that worksheet. After getting feedback
from their peers, students were allowed sufficient time to make modifications, corrections, additions, and
deletions before submitting their essays to the researcher for grading.
For students of the experimental group, the persuasive essay-writing prompt of the week was posted by the
teacher on the class blog. After they were given the link to the class blog, they were asked to write their essays at
home or in the computer lab at the college and then post them for their peers to give and take feedback through
the class blog according to the setting mentioned above. An online peer feedback worksheet, the structure of
which was the same as the printed one was posted on the class blog for the experimental group students.
According to this worksheet, experimental group students were asked to read their peers' posted essays, then post
their feedbacks and comments on their peers' writings by giving thoughtful and thorough responses to the
questions on that worksheet. Students' essays and feedbacks were all posted with the students’ names. In addition
to working in dyads, experimental group students had the option of reading all the posted essays and feedbacks of
their colleagues, downloading them and/or printing them out. Certainly, students were allowed full time, as they
work at home, to make required modifications, in the light of their peers' posted feedbacks, before posting their
essays to the researcher for grading.
6.6 Post-testing
On 3 rd April, 2010, after finishing the treatment, the persuasive writing test was re-administered, as a posttest, to
level two business management students, the participants of the this study, in order to post-assess their
persuasive writing skills. The test was also re-administered inside the classroom, during a regular writing class
and under the direct supervision of the researcher.
6 .7 Statistical analysis of data
After finishing post-testing procedures, a “t” test for small samples was used to analyze the differences between
means of scores of the study participants.
7. Findings and discussion
Following is a discussion of the results obtained. Scores of the subjects in the pre and the post measurements of
persuasive writing were compared. Results of comparisons revealed a significant improvement in experimental
group students' persuasive writing.
60
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
7. 1 Testing the first hypothesis
The first hypothesis stipulated, “There is no statistically significant difference between the mean scores obtained
by students of the experimental group and those of the control group in the pre-test ofpersuasive writing’’. Table
(2) shows a comparison of the mean scores of the experimental group students and those of the control group in
the pre-test of persuasive writing. According to this table, there is no statistically significant difference between
the mean scores of the two groups. Thus, the first hypothesis was affirmed.
7.2 Testing the second hypothesis
The second hypothesis stipulated, “ There is a statistically significant difference favoring the experimental group
between the mean scores obtained by students of the experimental group and those of the control group in the
post-test of persuasive writing”. Table (3) shows a comparison of the mean scores of the experimental group
students and those of the control group in the post-test of persuasive writing. According to this table, there is a
statistically significant difference between means of scores obtained by students of the experimental group and
those of the control group in the post-test of persuasive writing. These differences are in favor of the
experimental group students. The experimental group students got a higher mean (15.0500) than that obtained by
students of the control group (12.7500). The result of the t-test shows that t-value = (-4.87) and the difference is
significant at (0.01) level.
These findings affirm the second hypothesis and indicate that the experimental group outperformed the control
group in the posttest of persuasive writing. The superiority of the experimental group over the control group is
attributed to the effectiveness of the blog-based peer feedback that the experimental group students received on
their persuasive writing.
The findings of the present study are compatible with the results of (Fellner & Apple, 2006; Jones, 2006;
Mynard, 2007; Namvar et al„ 2009; Sun, 2009), who investigated the effectiveness of utilizing weblogs in
EFL/ESL language learning. Results of these studies, together with the present one, indicated that Blogging, not
only, facilitated language learning, but encouraged students to reflect on their learning and to structure their
thoughts.
These findings are in line with the results of many of the previous studies that investigated the effectiveness of
using online peer feedback on language learning (Bauer & Figl, 2006; Wu 's , 2006; Ertmer et ah, 2007;
Guardado & Shi, 2007; Ho & Savignon, 2007; Lu & Bol, 2007; Rourke et ah, 2008; Ware & O'Dowd, 2008;
Doris, 2009; among others). Results of these studies, together with the present one, indicated that using online
peer feedback, as opposed to, face-to-face, could be very beneficial in developing foreign/second language
writing.
Actually, through weblogs, EFL business management students were encouraged to trust their own linguistic
abilities and they had the opportunity to write freely and express themselves in a relaxed and non-threatening
environment. Keeping in mind that their essays were going to be published online for authentic readers, as well
as, EFL colleagues who would comment on their postings, students wrote more carefully.
It is clear that, the corrections that EFL business management students in the experimental group received from
their peers through the weblog had a greater impact on their persuasive writing than normal face-to-face
feedback. These corrections were done in a far more personalized and unthreatening manner, as they were freed
from the embarrassment to comment on their peers' writings in traditional classroom face-to-face peer feedback.
Above all, according to the norms of appropriateness in the Arabic and Islamic culture, being too direct in telling
someone face-to-face about his mistakes sounds aggressive and impolite. In addition, this culture places a strong
value in listening and silence in traditional classrooms. Consequently, in using weblogs, business management
students, experienced s a suitable and a face-saving environment in which they give and receive feedback on
their writings from their peers that resulted in an immense improvement in their persuasive writing.
8. Conclusions
The present study attempted to investigate the effect of using blog-based peer feedback on the persuasive writing
of EFL business management students at the community college in Bisha, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia.
Results of the analysis of the differences between means of scores of the study subjects in the
pre-post-measurements revealed a significant improvement in the students' persuasive writing. This
improvement was attributed to the effectiveness of using blog-based peer feedback. These results indicate that
blog-based peer feedback is a valuable means for improving students' writing and increasing their confidence as
EFL writers. Blogs could be an important forum not only for language improvement but also for social
interaction, cooperative learning and negotiation of meaning.
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
61
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
9. Implications
In the light of these findings, some important pedagogical implications related to teaching in general and the
teaching of composition in particular, are discussed. As for teaching, it is recommended that blog-based peer
feedback is to be used in many courses and not only with language courses as it proved a potentially practical
way of giving and receiving feedback in our digital age. Teachers should encourage using blog-based techniques
other than peer feedback in the teaching of different courses. Students should be encouraged and helped to
connect with their peers in other countries through weblogs to give and receive feedback. The relaxed and
unthreatening atmosphere offered by weblogs should be better utilized in teaching other language skills and
other disciplines especially among shy students. Careful and realistic web-based peer feedback training is
urgently needed for students belonging to Saudi, as well as, similar conservative cultures as a preliminary step
towards keener and fruitful peer-feedback.
As for the teaching of composition, using blog-based peer feedback in the foreign\second language writing class
can expand the audience of the students and allow them to feel that they are writing to more than just their
colleagues or their teacher. In conservative societies, where strict gender segregation is enforced and where girls
and boys are separated in school, blog-based peer feedback could be an effective tool for the mutual benefit of
the two genders and for providing a forum, not only for the development of composition writing, but also for
social interaction and negotiation of meaning.
10. Suggestions for further research
The results of this study can contribute to the literature on the potential values of using the appropriate features
of the Web 2.0 era in educational settings. Further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of using the
appropriate features of the Web 2.0 era on Arab learners’ apprehension of writing in a foreign language and on
their confidence as EFL writers. More research is needed to examine the effectiveness of using weblogs, as well
as other appropriate features of the Web 2.0 era, in teaching other subjects and in teaching other language skills.
Furthermore, future descriptive studies are needed to identify the attitudes of learners with Arabic cultural
backgrounds towards using the appropriate features of the Web 2.0 era in education.
References
American Alliance for Excellent Education (AFEE). (2006). StraightA’s: Public education policy and progress.
6( 20), 1-7. [Online] Available: http://www.rss.kl2.nc.us/Erwin/tech/Writing_files/Volume6No20.pdf (January
22,2010)
Alavi, S., & Kaivanpanah, S. (2007). Feedback expectancy and EFL learners' achievement in English. Journal of
Theory’ and Practice in Education, 3(2): 181-196. [Online] Available:
http://eku.comu.edu.tr/index/3/2/smohammad_skaivanpanah.pdf (January 22, 2010)
Anderson, H. (2006). Wisconsin TESOL: Literacy for all. Teaching English as a Second/Foreign Language
Newsletter, 6(7), 1-9. [Online] Available: https://www.uwec.edu/esl/minors/Newsletters/Oct06.pdf (January 22,
2010)
Bauer, C., & Figl, K. (2006). Differences of online and face-to-face peer review regarding type and quality.
Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory’ Learning in Digital Age (pp.
423-428). Portugal: Lisboa. [Online] Available: http://www.iadis.net/dFfmal_uploads/200608C065.pdf (January
18,2010)
Brickman, B. (1992, March). Advertisements in the basic skills writing class. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Christensen, D., Barnes, J., & Rees, D. (2004). Improving the writing skills of accounting students: An
experiment. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 7(1), 45-52. [Online] Available:
http://www.cluteinstitute-onlinejournals.com/PDFs/20045.pdf (January 22, 2010)
De Voider, M., et al. (2007). Espace: A student peer-feedback tool enhances the educational quality of
assignments without overburdening faculty or adding administrative costs. Educause Quarterly, (3), 63-66.
Doris, D. (2009). Peer feedback through blogs: Student and teacher perceptions in an advanced German class.
ReCALL, 27(1), 17-36.
Edwards, J., & Mehring, J. (2005). Just-in-time teaching. Hawai ’ i TESOL, 75(1), 1-12. [Online] Available:
http://www.hawaiitesol.org/Word%202005%20Sept.pdf (January 22, 2010)
62
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Ernst, B. (2005). To blog or not to blog? Teaching English as a Second/Foreign Language Newsletter, 4(2), 1-11.
Ertmer, P., et al. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory
study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), article four. [Online] Available:
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/voll2/issue2/ertmer.html (January 22, 2010)
Fellner, T., & Apple, M. (2006). Developing writing fluency and lexical complexity with blogs. The JALT CALL
Journal, 2(1), 15-26. [Online] Available: http://ialtcall.Org/iournaFarticles/2 1 Fellner.pdf (January 13, 2010)
Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher
feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational
Research, 36(1), 143-162.
Godwin-Jones, B. (2003). Emerging Technologies. Blogs and Wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration.
Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 12-16.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle
and high schools. A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York, Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education. pp. 1-66. [Online] Available:
http://www.all4ed.org/fdes/archive/publications/WritingNext/WritingNext.pdf (January 22, 2010)
Guardado, M. & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition
24, 443-461
Hall, J. (2006). A story of using weblogs in English teacher training. In K. Bradford-Watts, C. Ikeguchi & M.
Swanson (Eds.), Proceedings of the J ALT 2005 Conference, (pp. 723-734). Tokyo.
Ho, M., & Savignon, S. (2007). Face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review in EFL writing. CALICO
Journal, 24 (2), 269-290.
Jack, E. (2009). Don't let poor writing stifle company growth. American Society for Training and Development,
[Online] Available: http://fmdarticles.eom/p/artieles/mi_m4467/is_200910/ai_n42041656/ (January 12, 2010)
Jones, S. (2006). Blogging and ESL Writing: A case study of how students responded to the use of weblogs as a
pedagogical tool for the writing process approach in a community college ESL writing class. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation. Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin.
Lin, H., & Chien, P. (2009). An investigation into effectiveness of peer feedback. Journal of Applied Foreign
Languages Fortune Institute of Technology’, 3, 79-87.
Lu, R., & Bol, L. (2007). A Comparison of anonymous versus identifiable e-peer review on college student
writing performance and the extent of critical feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(2), 100-115.
Lundstrom, K. (2006). Teaching writing through peer revising and reviewing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
The Faculty of Brigham Young University.
Miranda, N. (2003). Non-native English speaking teachers' continuous improvement: A double challenge,
NNEST NEWSLETTER, 5(1), 1-4. [Online] Available: http://nnest.moussu.net/news/news5_l.pdf (January 22,
2010 )
Mulder, R., & Pearce, J. (2007). PRAZE: Innovating teaching through online peer review. In ICT: Providing
choices for learners and learning. Proceedings of The 24th Annual Ascilite Conference, Nanyang Technological
University (PP. 727-736). Singapore: Nanyang. [Online] Available:
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/mulder.pdf (January 20, 2010)
Mynard, J. (2007). A blog as a tool for reflection for English language learners. The Philippine ESL Journal, 1,
77-90. [Online] Available: http://www.philippine-esl-journal.com/August-2008-Voll.pdf (January 20, 2010)
Namvar, Y., Naderi, E., Shariatmadari, A. & Seifnaraghi, M. (2009). Studying the impact of web-based learning
(weblog) with a problem solving approach on student's reflective thinking. iJET, 4(4), 33-38. [Online] Available:
http://www.uh.cu/static/documents/STA/Studying%20Impact%20WebBased%20Learning.pdf (January 18,
2010)
Olshtain, E. (2001). Functional tasks for mastering the mechanics of writing and going just beyond. In M.
Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (PP. 206-217), 3 rd edition. USA:
Heinle& Heinle.
Rourke, A., Mendelssohn, J., Coleman K., & Allen, B. (2008). Did I mention it’s anonymous? The triumphs and
pitfalls of online peer review. In Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings
of the Ascilite 2008 Conference, Institute of Teaching and Learning, Deakin University (pp. 830-840). Australia:
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
63
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Melbourne. [Online] Available: http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/rourke.pdf (January
20,2010)
Saunders, D. (1992). Peer tutoring in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 1 7(2), 211-218.
Sun, Y. (2009). Voice blog: An exploratory study of language learning. Language Learning & Technology’,
75(2), 88-103.
Ulrich, T., Michenzi, A., & Blouch, W. (2003). CPAs assess the development of professional skills of recent
accounting graduates. Journal of the Academy of Business Education, 4, 126-137. [Online] Available:
http://www.abe.sju.edu/toc.html (January 16, 2010)
Ware, P., & O'Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning &
Technology’, 72(1), 43-63.
Wu, C. (2006). Blogs in TEFL: A new promising vehicle. US-China Education Review, 5(5), 69-73. [Online]
Available: http://www.teacher.org.cn/doc/ucedu200605/ucedu20060512.pdf (January 10, 2010)
Xie, Y., & Sharma, P. (2004). Students' lived experience of using weblogs in a class: An exploratory study.
Proceedings of the Annual Conference for the association of Educational Communications and Technology
(pp.839-846). Chicago: 1L [Online] Available:
http://www.blocdeblocs.net/doctorat/2007/ll/12/students%e2%80%99-lived-experience-of-using-weblogs-in-a-
class-an-exploratory-study/ (January 27, 2010)
Appendix (l):Pre-post Persuasive Writing Test
King Khalid University
Community College in Bisha
Intensive English program (2)
Persuasive Writing Pre-Test
DIRECTIONS
1. This is a test of your persuasive writing.
2. You will have thirty (30) minutes to finish it.
3. The test comprises only one writing prompt.
4. You are asked to write on this writing prompt.
5. Before you begin planning and writing, read the writing prompt carefully to understand exactly what you
are being asked to do.
6. Your writing will be evaluated on the evidence it provides of your ability to meet five main criteria of
persuasive writing; statement of position; reasons supporting your position; anticipating opposing viewpoints or
reasons against your position; organization of your writing;; and writing conventions.
7. Try planning before you write.
8. You may use the unlined pages in this test booklet to plan your writing. These pages will not be scored.
Your writing only on the lined pages will be scored. You may not need all the lined pages, but to ensure you
have enough room to finish, do NOT skip lines.
9. You may write corrections or additions neatly between the lines of your essay, but do NOT write in the
margins of the lined pages. Illegible essays cannot be scored, so you must write clearly.
10. If you finish before time is called, you may review your work. Lay your pen down immediately when time
is called.
DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO DO SO.
The Persuasive Writing Pre-test Prompt
Suppose that the company you are working in intends to make a television advertisement to attract buyers to its
new product. This advertisement is intended to use sexual attraction as a tool of persuasion by drawing attention
and interest to this product and consequently increasing sales.
Write a five-paragraph persuasive essay in which you support or criticize the use of sex in advertising. Clearly
state your position and justify it using a series of clear, well-supported reasons. Make sure to anticipate and
address opposing viewpoints or reasons against your position.
64
ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN1916-4750
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
END OF PRE-TEST
The Persuasive Writing Post-test Prompt
Suppose that, due to budget cuts, the manager decided to reduce the level of wages and salaries in the company
you are working in. Of course, this action has its effects on the overall productivity of the company. Write a
five-paragraph persuasive essay in which you persuade the manager why this is or is not a good idea.
Clearly state your position and justify it using a series of clear, well-supported reasons. Make sure to anticipate
and address opposing viewpoints or reasons against your position.
End of post-Test
Appendix (2) : 5-point Scoring Rubric for the Persuasive Writing Pre-Post Test
Student Name:- Date:
Criteria
Scoring Scale
Score
4
3
2
i
0
Claim or Position
The student takes a
position or makes a
claim and explains
why it is debatable or
argumentative.
The student takes a
position or makes a
claim but does not
explain why it is
debatable or
argumentative
The student takes a
position or makes a
claim but it is hidden,
confused, or vague.
The student attempts
to take a position or
make a claim but his
position or his claim
cannot
be identified.
The student does not
take a position or
make a claim at all.
Reasons
Supporting the
Claim or the
Position
The student provides
clear, accurate,
strong and sufficient
reasons to support his
position or his claim.
The student does not
provide sufficient
reasons to support his
position or his claim.
The student provides
limited reasons that do
not support his position
or his claim well.
The student attempts
to provide reasons to
support his position
or claim but the
reasons provided are
unconvincing and
unrelated to
his position or his
claim.
The student
provides no reasons
at all that support
his position or his
claim.
Opposing
Viewpoints or
Reasons against
the Claim or the
Position
The student
anticipates opposing
viewpoints or reasons
against his claim or
his position and he
addresses them
successfully and
thoroughly.
The student anticipates
and discusses opposing
viewpoints or reasons
against his claim or his
position, but leaves out
important reasons.
The student anticipates
opposing viewpoints or
reasons against his
claim or his position
but fails to explain
them in a way that
strengthens his claim
or his position.
The student attempts
to anticipate some
opposing viewpoints
or reasons against his
claim or his position
but in vain.
The student does not
anticipate opposing
viewpoints and give
no reasons against
his claim or his
position at all.
Organization
The student's writing
is clearly developed
and well organized; it
has a convincing
opening, strong
informative body and
satisfying
conclusion.
Paragraph format is
appropriate.
The student's writing is
reasonably developed
but lacks clarity. It has a
beginning, middle and
an end. It generally uses
appropriate paragraph
format.
The student's writing is
usually organized but
sometimes gets off
topic. There is a
number of errors in
paragraph format.
The student attempts
to structure his
writing but the
structure is
unsuccessfully
developed.
The student's
writing is aimless
and totally lacks
organization.
Writing
Conventions
The student's writing
exhibits no
grammatical,
spelling, or
punctuation errors. It
consistently, exhibits
variety in sentence
structure and
accuracy in word
choice.
The student's errors in
grammar, spelling, or
punctuation do not
interfere with
understanding. His
writing exhibits some
variety in sentence
structure and good word
choice.
The student's errors in
grammar, spelling, or
punctuation sometimes
interfere with
understanding.
His writing exhibits
uneven control over
sentence boundaries
and sentence structure.
It may exhibit some
inaccurate word
choices.
The student's errors
in grammar, spelling,
or punctuation
interfere
with understanding
in much of the
writing. It exhibits
minimal control over
sentence boundaries
and sentence
structure. Word
choice is often
inaccurate.
The student's errors
in grammar,
spelling, or
punctuation
severely
hinder
understanding
across the whole
writing. It exhibits
no control over
sentence boundaries
and
sentence structure
and inaccurate word
choice
in all the writing.
! Total Score
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
65
www.ccsenet.org/elt
English Language Teaching
Vol. 3, No. 3; September 2010
Table 1. Experimental group students’ setting in giving and taking peer-feedback during the eight weeks of the
treatment
Weeks (1 & 5 )
Weeks (2& 6)
Weeks (3 & 7)
Weeks (4 & 8)
1+2
1+10
5+10
3+10
3+4
2+9
4+9
4+9
5+6
3+8
3+8
5+8
7+8
4+7
2+7
6+7
9+10
5+6
1+6
1+2
Table 2. “t” value, standard deviations and Manes of scores of the students of the control and experimental
groups in the pre-test of persuasive writing
Group
N
M
SD
“T” value
Significance
Control
10
9.8000
1.585
.58
No Significance
Experimental
10
9.6500
1.203
Table 3. “t” value, standard deviations and Manes of scores of the students of the control and experimental
groups in the post-test of persuasive writing
Group
N
M
SD
“T” value
Significance
Control
10
12.7500
1.087
-4.87
0.01
Experimental
10
15.0500
1.499
66
ISSN 1916-4742
E-ISSN1916-4750
