同伴互评作为一种促学的教学活动被广泛应用于二语写作课堂。尽管近年来对于同伴互评的研究持续增加，但对于学生如何参与同伴互评活动的研究仍然处于起步阶段。鉴于此，本研究从社会文化视角出发，探究大学英语写作课同伴互评活动中学习者作为反馈提供者和接收者在认知、行为、情感三个维度的参与度，以及在此过程中的收获。 本研究采用质性和量化相结合的研究方法，以15名选修写作课的本科生作为研究对象，通过有声思维、回顾性访谈、作文文本、修改后的作文文本，以及文本中标注的同伴反馈等数据分析，主要研究结果如下：1）无论作为反馈提供者还是作为接收者，学生都能在认知、行为、情感三个维度上积极参与同伴互评。学生能够在语言和内容层面提供有效同伴反馈，并且能够根据同伴反馈做出有效的修改。学习者在提供反馈和修改的过程中运用了多种策略以及认知和元认知操作，并经历了丰富且动态的学业成就感、认知情绪、社交情绪和话题情绪。学生作为反馈提供者在认知和行为上的参与度显著高于作为接收者在这两个层面的参与度。2）学生在写作产出和自我感知的学习层面都有所收获。在写作产出方面，基于同伴互评，学生在语言和内容方面都有所提升，并且与他们作为反馈接收者的参与度呈显著正相关。学生在学习层面上自我感知的收获主要体现为对使用策略解决问题能力的培养、批判思维技能的发展、合作学习意识以及对同伴互评和英语写作积极情感的提高。此外，同伴互评参与度受到个人因素和环境因素的影响，比如学习者对二语学习和写作的观念、对于其作为反馈接收者和提供者不同角色的看法；对同伴关系、同伴写作水平和作文质量的感知，学习经历以及自我效能感。 本研究的贡献包括：1）扩充现有关于同伴互评学习者参与度的研究框架，进一步延伸和扩展了“参与度”概念的每一个维度，并将反馈提供者和接收者同时纳入框架； 2）提出二语写作同伴互评参与度模型，将同伴反馈置于更广泛的活动系统中，展示学生在与社会文化环境互动过程中的学习情况；3）提供数据分析的新视角，将参与度指标化并进行量化分析，量化和质性研究方法的结合使研究结论更全面、更有说服力；4）为教师提供提高同伴互评参与度切实可行的建议。本研究有助于深化教师和研究者对于同伴互评学习者参与度的理解，引导学生提高参与度，从而使学生在同伴互评中获益更多。
As a popular pedagogical activity with many possible benefits, peer feedback has attracted much attention from writing researchers and practitioners, and has been widely adopted in EFL writing classes in recent decades. Although studies on peer feedback in EFL writing have proliferated over the past decades, research on how students engage in peer feedback activity is still in its infancy, especially the research that considers both providers and receivers. To fill this gap, the current research investigated Chinese university students’ cognitive, behavioral, and affective engagement with peer feedback as both providers and receivers in an EFL writing course from a sociocultural perspective, and explored their achievements from the peer feedback engagement. This study adopted quantitative and qualitative methods with 15 students enrolled in the writing course. Multiple sources of data were collected, including think-aloud protocols, retrospective interviews, writing drafts, revised writing drafts and on-script peer feedback. The major findings are as follows: 1） Students actively engaged in the peer feedback process cognitively, behaviorally and affectively as both providers and receivers. They were able to provide effective feedback in language and content, and made successful revisions based on the feedback. Additionally, students demonstrated the ability to self-edit their writing. Various provision and revision strategies, and cognitive and metacognitive operations were employed to understand the essay, identify problems, solve problems and make revisions. Moreover, students experienced diverse and dynamic achievement, epistemic and social emotions throughout the processes of both providing and receiving feedback, while topic emotions were only reported by students as providers. The cognitive and behavioral engagement was significantly higher when providing peer feedback than when receiving it. 2） Students achieved in both writing products and learning. Regarding the improvements in writing products, students made successful revisions in both language and content, and most of the revisions were peer-triggered rather than self-editing. Moreover, successful revisions in both language and content were significantly positively correlated with their engagement as receivers. However, only content-level improvements were significantly related to cognitive and metacognitive operations used in the revision process. Students’ perceived achievements in learning were reflected in the cultivation of the ability to use strategies to address a problem, the development of critical thinking skills, the enhancement of cooperative learning awareness, and the growth of positive emotions on peer feedback and English writing. The results suggested that the complexity of engagement with peer feedback could be influenced by individual and contextual factors. Individual factors included beliefs about L2 learning and writing, beliefs about the role as a provider and as a receiver, learning experiences and self-efficacy; contextual factors involved students’ perceptions of their relationship with peers, of peers’ English proficiency and writing quality, and of the feedback received. The present study contributed to the existing research in the following aspects: 1） It expanded the current frameworks for students’ engagement with peer feedback by extending the three dimensions of engagement and taking both the feedback provider and receiver into consideration. 2） It drew an exploratory framework that put peer feedback engagement into a broader activity system, demonstrating how students interacted with the sociocultural environment and how learning happened in the process. This framework could serve as a helpful tool for further research and practice in peer feedback engagement of EFL writing. 3） It analyzed the qualitative data quantitatively. The engagement items were coded and analyzed quantitatively. Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches made the results more convincing and comprehensive. 4） It offered feasible suggestions for classroom teachers on how to improve students’ engagement with peer feedback. It is hoped that through investigating peer feedback engagement from the sociocultural perspective, the study will shed light on a deeper understanding of students’ engagement with peer feedback, and help teachers to guide the less engaged students to be more engaged and make more achievements.
