Investigating the Effectiveness of Web-Based Peer Review in Students’ Drafts Revision: A Critical EAP Perspective

Xu Liu*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Previous research on peer review considered it as a strategy of improving students’ writing (Baker, 2016; Hu, 2005). To investigate its effectiveness, this research has established a small corpus based on the data from the 22 students’ writing drafts and their corresponding written comments of 13,9261 words in total on the Peerceptiv National Writing and Feedback Contest (PNWFC). Then, Python was utilized as a tool to calculate the difference between four dimensions including accuracy, helpfulness, reviewing and writing. According to the quantitative analysis, it showed that students could hardly benefit from peer feedback. After that, three online structured interviews were arranged to further explore the development of English as a Second Language (L2) students’ discourse competence development. Given the consequence of qualitative data, students could revise their grammatical errors and language inaccuracies through peer review. They might implicitly develop their ability to think critically, which is the core of the formation of discoursal awareness in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course. More importantly, receivers could know of their weaknesses, and also perceive the accuracy and fairness of their discourses. Finally, essential implications might be helpful for teachers to carry out peer review and writing tasks in the future.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1556-1567
Number of pages12
JournalTheory and Practice in Language Studies
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2022
Externally publishedYes


  • EAP
  • corpus linguistics
  • critical thinking
  • peer review
  • written discourse competence


Dive into the research topics of 'Investigating the Effectiveness of Web-Based Peer Review in Students’ Drafts Revision: A Critical EAP Perspective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this