Translation students’ peer feedback for learning English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Findings from a case study in Lithuania

• Authors: Nijolė Burkšaitienė

Abstracts

EN

Aim. The use of feedback (including peer-generated feedback) for learning has been widely investigated across many fields of study, however, no research into its use in Translation studies has been conducted yet. To fill in this gap, the present small-scale study was carried out at a university in Lithuania. It investigated undergraduate translation students’ feedback on their peers’ ESP oral performance by addressing the main research question: what areas are identified as those that need further work on? Methods. The present research was conducted with the participation of 42 undergraduate students who were majors in Translation studies. To carry out the research, qualitative methodology was chosen. The data were drawn from the study participants’ feedback sheets and investigated using inductive content analysis. Results.  The study resulted in the identification and detailed description of four major categories and ten subcategories that reflect the areas that call for further work on, including the study participants’ presentation content, the use of language, presentation delivery mode, and the use of slides. Conclusion. The findings lead to the conclusion that peer feedback, as used in this study, can be viewed as a tool providing its receivers with an opportunity for learning as it supports and directs them toward further improvement.

Keywords

EN

peer feedback; English for Specific Purposes (ESP); presentations; Translation Studies; higher education

• Publisher: Fundacja Pro Scientia Publica
• Journal: Journal of Education Culture and Society
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 173-187

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Nijolė Burkšaitienė

• Department of Translation Studies, Institute for Literary, Cultural and Translation Studies, Faculty of Philology, Vilnius University

References

• Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.
• Boud, D., & Molley, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
• Burkšaitienė, N. (2012). Peer feedback for fostering students’ metacognitive skills of thinking about learning in a course of English for Law. Socialinių mokslų studijos // Societal Studies, 4(4), 1341-1355.
• Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2010). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395-407.
• Chen, T. (2016). Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: A research synthesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 365-397.
• Day, I. N. Z., Saab, N., & Admiraal, W. (2021). Online peer feedback on video presentations: type of feedback and improvement of presentation skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Ahead of print, 1-15. doi:10.1080/02602938.2021.1904826.
• Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.
• Fillius, R. M., de Kleijn, R. A. M., Uijl, S. G., Prins, F. J., van Rijen, H. V. M., & Grobbee, D. E. (2018). Strengthening dialogue peer feedback aiming for deep learning in SPOCs. Computers & Education, 125(2018), 86-100. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.004
• Gan, Z., Hu, G., Wang, W., Nang, H., & An, Z. (2020). Feedback behaviour and preference in university academic English courses: associations with English Language self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Ahead-of-print, 1-16. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2020.1810628.
• Geitz, G., Joosten-ten Brinke, D., & Kirschner, P. (2015). Goal orientation, deep learning, and sustainable feedback in higher business education. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 26, 273-292.
• Gikandi, J. W., & Morrow, D. (2016). Designing and implementing peer formative feedback within online learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(2),153-170.
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 8-112.
• Huang, S.-C. (2018). A GEARed peer feedback model and implications for learning facilitation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1194-1210. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1439881.
• Knight, P., & Yorke, M. (2003). Assessment, learning and employability. Maidenhead, UK: SRHE/Open University Press.
• Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290.
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
• Pham, H. T. P. (2021). Computer-mediated and face-to-face peer feedback: student feedback and revision in EFL writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Published online 15 January 2021. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2020.1868530.
• Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & O’Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: all that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 277-289.
• Ruegg, R. (2018). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 46(2), 87-102.
• Walker, M. (2009). An investigation into written comments on assignments: do students find them usable? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 67-78.
• Yang, Y.-F. (2016). Transforming and constructing academic knowledge through online peer feedback in summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 683-702.
• Zumbrunn, S., Tadlock, J., & Roberts, E. D. (2011). Encouraging self-regulated learning in the classroom: a review of the literature. Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium: Virginia Commonwealth University. Available at : <https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1017&context=merc_pubs> [14/06/2021].

Identifiers

DOI

10.15503/jecs2022.1.173.187

Biblioteka Nauki

18055639