The Correlation between Online Peer Review and Academic Writing Students’ Learning Styles

Emilia Ninik Aydawati, Dwi Rukmini, Dwi Anggani Linggar Bharati, Sri Wuli Fitriati


Peer review studies have been done for years. It has been found that by having these activities, learners will get benefits from the communication with the peer who can give them input to improve their writing performance. Peer review can be done face to face or online.  Face to face peer review is done synchronously where two students are having discussion on their essay, whereas online peer review can be done synchronously or asynchronously. This preliminary study investigates how the application of synchronous online peer review in Academic Writing class can be implemented to help them to do revision and improve their writing skills. The participants of this study is 50 students of academic writing class from two different class.  This is an experimental study where the students were treated to get peer review activities from the software which is uploaded in   web. They did the practice twice with the shuffled questions. This was aimed that they would be ready to give review.  Pre-test and post-test were conducted and Gracian questionnaire to know their learning styles was uploaded in the web for them to fill in order to know their learning styles. it was found out that there are some improvement and there is correlation between their academic skills and the learning styles.


Writing Class, online peer review

Full Text:



Aghaee, N., & Hansson, H. (2013). Peer Portal: Quality enhancement in thesis writing using self-managed peer review on a mass scale. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 186-203.

Al-hazmi, S. H., & Scholfield, P. (2007). Enforced Revision with Checklist and Peer Feedback in EFL Writing : The Example of Saudi University Students. Scientific Journal of King Faisal University, 8(2), 237–267.

Altstaedter, L. L., & Doolittle, P. (2014). Students’ perceptions of peer feedback. Argentinian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 60–76.

Anthis, K., & Adams, L. (2012). Scaffolding: Relationships Among Online Quiz Parameters and Classroom Exam Scores. Teaching of Psychology, 39(4), 284–287. doi:

Aydawati, E. N. (2016). A Study of Students’ Perception on Peer Review Activities in Writing Class. 2nd International Seminar on Education Technology (ISET), 1–30.

Baker, K. M. (2016). Peer review as a strategy for improving students’ writing process. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1–14. doi:

Bijami, M., Kashef, S. H., & Nejad, M. S. (2013). Peer Feedback in Learning English Writing: Advantages and Disadvantages. Journal of Studies in Education, 3(4), 91–97. doi:

Chiramanee, T., & Kulprasit, W. (2014). Journal Writing with Peer Feedback: A Friend or A Foe for EFL Learners. International Journal of English Language Education, 2(2), 142. doi:

Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of Peer E-Feedback on Turkish EFL Students’ Writing Performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61–84. doi:

Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge University press. doi:

Jamsen, K. (2012). 7 Tips for making Peer Review Work. Time to Write, 15(1&2).

Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290. doi:

Macleod, L. (1992). Computer-Aided Writing, 87–94.

Martín, E. (2016). How double-blind peer review works and what it takes to be a good referee. Current Sociology, 64(5), 691–698. doi:

Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157–171. doi:

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-dick, D. (2003). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning : A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2), 37–41. doi:

Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and user acceptance of peer rating in EFL writing classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 31–54. doi:

Sermsook, K., Liamnimitr, J., & Pochakorn, R. (2017). An Analysis of Errors in Written English Sentences : A Case Study of Thai EFL Students. English Language Teaching, 10(3). doi:

Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing : Product , process , and students ’ reflections, 14, 153–173. doi:

Tai, H.-C., Lin, W.-C., & Yang, S. C. (2015). Exploring the Effects of Peer Review and Teachers’ Corrective Feedback on EFL Students’ Online Writing Performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 284–309. doi:

Thokwane, D. (2011). Using Peer Review to Promote Writing Development in ESL Classes. All Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects. Retrieved from

Wichadee, S. (2013). Improving students’ summary writing ability through collaboration: A comparison between online wiki group and conventional face-to-face group. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(3), 107–116.


Copyright (c) 2018 Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature

| pISSN (print): 1412-3320 | eISSN (online): 2502-4914 | web
analytics View My Stats