Suppr超能文献

同伴反馈与中国医学生英语学术写作能力发展:一项纵向干预研究

Peer feedback and Chinese medical students' English academic writing development: a longitudinal intervention study.

机构信息

Moray House School of Education and Sport, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.

出版信息

BMC Med Educ. 2023 Aug 16;23(1):578. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04574-w.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Studies have documented that utilizing peer feedback can enhance students' English academic writing skills. Little is known, however, about the effects of incorporating peer feedback to enhance English as a second language (L2) medical students' academic writing performance.

METHODS

This longitudinal interventional study examines Chinese medical students' English academic writing skills development via peer feedback in four parallel classes over an 18-week semester between the experimental and control groups (n = 124).

RESULTS

Significant increases in the experimental group's performance in the post-test were found after 18-week instructions (pre- vs. post-test: overall score, p < .001; task response, p < .001; coherence and cohesion, p < .001; lexical resource, p < .001; grammatical range and accuracy, p < .001), and the effects were retained in the delayed post-test 6 weeks later (post- vs. delayed post-test: overall score, p = .561; task response, p = .585; coherence and cohesion, p = .533; lexical resource, p = .796; grammatical range and accuracy, p = .670). Little improvement was found in the control group in the post-test (pre- vs. post-test: overall score, p = .213; task response, p = .275; coherence and cohesion, p = .383; lexical resource, p = .367; grammatical range and accuracy, p = .180) or the delayed post-test (post- vs. delayed post-test: overall score, p = .835; task response, p = .742; coherence and cohesion, p = .901; lexical resource, p = .897; grammatical range and accuracy, p = .695). Between-group comparisons indicate that the experimental group outperformed the control group in the post- and the delayed post-tests, as shown in their overall score and scores on the four components.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating peer feedback into process-oriented medical English writing classroom teaching can effectively enhance Chinese medical students' English academic writing skills over time, while the traditional product-oriented writing instructions had little help in improving Chinese medical students' academic writing skills. This longitudinal intervention study develops our understanding of the effectiveness of peer feedback in L2 academic writing pedagogy. It offers instructional implications for L2 writing teachers to teach English academic writing among medical students in China and beyond. Limitations and suggestions for future studies are discussed.

摘要

背景

研究表明,利用同伴反馈可以提高学生的英语学术写作技能。然而,对于将同伴反馈纳入以英语为第二语言(L2)的医学学生学术写作表现的影响,知之甚少。

方法

本纵向干预研究通过实验组和对照组(n=124)在 18 周的学期中四个平行班的同伴反馈,考察了中国医学生的英语学术写作技能发展。

结果

实验组在 18 周的指导后,在后测中的表现有显著提高(前测与后测:总分,p<0.001;任务反应,p<0.001;连贯与衔接,p<0.001;词汇资源,p<0.001;语法范围和准确性,p<0.001),并且在 6 周后的延迟后测中仍保留(后测与延迟后测:总分,p=0.561;任务反应,p=0.585;连贯与衔接,p=0.533;词汇资源,p=0.796;语法范围和准确性,p=0.670)。对照组在后测(前测与后测:总分,p=0.213;任务反应,p=0.275;连贯与衔接,p=0.383;词汇资源,p=0.367;语法范围和准确性,p=0.180)或延迟后测(后测与延迟后测:总分,p=0.835;任务反应,p=0.742;连贯与衔接,p=0.901;词汇资源,p=0.897;语法范围和准确性,p=0.695)中几乎没有提高。组间比较表明,实验组在后测和延迟后测中的表现优于对照组,表现在总分和四个组成部分的得分上。

结论

将同伴反馈纳入以过程为导向的医学英语写作课堂教学中,可以有效地随着时间的推移提高中国医学生的英语学术写作技能,而传统的以产品为导向的写作指导对提高中国医学生的学术写作技能几乎没有帮助。这项纵向干预研究增进了我们对同伴反馈在 L2 学术写作教学中的有效性的理解。它为中国乃至其他地区的医学学生的 L2 写作教师提供了教学启示。讨论了研究的局限性和对未来研究的建议。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a2ad/10428647/eb20b7194c14/12909_2023_4574_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验