Revision from Multiple Feedback Sources: The Attitudes and Behaviors of Three Multilingual Student Writers

References

1. AndradeM. S.EvansN. W..(2013) Principles and practices for response in second language writing: Developing self-regulated learnersNew YorkRoutledge.
   [Google Scholar]
2. BeaufortA..(2007) College writing and beyond: A new framework for university writing instructionLoganUtah State University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. BergE. C..(1999) The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality.Journal of Second Language Writing8215–241.
   [Google Scholar]
4. ChamotA. U..(2005) Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research.Annual Review of Applied Linguistics25112–130.
   [Google Scholar]
5. ChingK. L..(2011) Apprenticeship in the instructor-led peer conference.Composition Studies39(2)101–119.
   [Google Scholar]
6. ConnorU.AsenavageK..(1994) Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision?.Journal of Second Language Writing3257–276.
   [Google Scholar]
7. DuffP. A..(2008) Case study research in applied linguisticsNew YorkErlbaum.
   [Google Scholar]
8. EcksteinG..(2013) Implementing and evaluating a writing conference program for international L2 writers across language proficiency levels.Journal of Second Language Writing22231–239.
   [Google Scholar]
9. EvansK..(2017) Engaging undergraduate writers: A study of motivational dynamics in the second language writing classroom (Doctoral dissertation)Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10258896).
   [Google Scholar]
10. FerrisD..(2014) Responding to student writing: Teachers’ philosophies and practices.Assessing Writing196–23.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Hamp-LyonsL..(2006) Feedback in portfolio-based writing coursesHylandK.HylandF..(Eds.)Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues140–161New YorkCambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. LekiI..(1990) Potential problems with peer responding in ESL writing classes.CATESOL Journal35–19.
    [Google Scholar]
13. LiuJ.SadlerR. W..(2003) The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing.Journal of English for Academic Purposes2193–227.
    [Google Scholar]
14. LundstromK.BakerW..(2009) To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing.Journal of Second Language Writing1830–43.
    [Google Scholar]
15. MangelsdorfK..(1992) Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think?.ELT Journal46274–284.
    [Google Scholar]
16. MendonçaC. O.JohnsonK. E..(1994) Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction.TESOL Quarterly28745–769.
    [Google Scholar]
17. MerriamS. B.TisdellE. J..(2016) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementationSan FranciscoJossey-Bass.
    [Google Scholar]
18. NelsonG. L.MurphyJ. M..(1993) Peer response groups: Do L2 writers use peer comments in revising their drafts?.TESOL Quarterly27135–142.
    [Google Scholar]
19. NewkirkT..(1984) Direction and misdirection in peer response.College Composition and Communication35301–311.
    [Google Scholar]
20. NewkirkT..(1995) The writing conference as performance.Research in the Teaching of English29193–215.
    [Google Scholar]
21. PaltridgeB..(2008) Textographies and the researching and teaching of writing.Iberica159–23.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Patthey-ChavezG. G.FerrisD. R..(1997) Writing conferences and the weaving of multi-voiced texts in college composition.Research in the Teaching of English3151–90.
    [Google Scholar]
23. PaulusT..(1999) The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing.Journal of Second Language Writing8265–289.
    [Google Scholar]
24. PolioC.FriedmanD. A..(2017) Understanding, evaluating, and conducting second language writing researchNew YorkRoutledge.
    [Google Scholar]
25. PriorP..(2004) Tracing process: How texts come into beingBazermanC.PriorP..(Eds.)What writing does and how it does it167–200Mahwah, NJErlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
26. SommersN..(1982) Responding to student writing.College Composition and Communication33148–156.
    [Google Scholar]
27. SwalesJ. M..(1998) Textography: Toward a contextualization of written academic discourse.Research on Language and Social Interactions31(1)109–121.
    [Google Scholar]
28. YanceyK. B.RobertsonL.TaczakK..(2014) Writing across contexts: Transfer, composition, and sites of writingBoulder, COUtah State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. YoungR. F.MillerE. R..(2004) Learning as changing participation: Discourse roles in ESL writing conferences.Modern Language Journal88519–535.
    [Google Scholar]
30. ZhangS..(1995) Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class.Journal of Second Language Writing4209–222.
    [Google Scholar]
31. ZhuW..(1995) Effects of training for peer response on students’ comments and interaction.Written Communication12492–528.
    [Google Scholar]
32. ZimmermanB. J..(1990) Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview.Educational Psychologist253–17.
    [Google Scholar]