Abstract
Student-centred learning (SCL), which highlights the importance of learning environments over direct instruction for collaborative and interactive learning, has enjoyed growing popularity in English-medium instruction (EMI) classrooms. To enhance SCL engagement, students may need to be empowered with autonomy, scaffolding and an authentic audience (Lee & Hannafin, Educ Technol Res Dev 64:707–734, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9422-5). However, little research has been conducted to examine SCL effectiveness in EMI contexts. This study investigates how well online peer assessment (OPA) activities, in the form of Moodle workshops, promotes SCL in two different undergraduate courses for English majors in an EMI university in China. Compared to traditional instruction, the OPA activities enabled students to be exposed to examples of language in use that were provided by peers. Impacts of OPA activities (in terms of autonomous learning, audience awareness in writing, and feedback focus on disciplinary issues) were evaluated by administering pre- and post-intervention questionnaire surveys, and analysing student submissions and peer feedback. The findings suggest the enhancement of students’ autonomous learning and audience awareness in writing after participating in the OPA activities. The feedback focus provided by assessors to those assessed was found to be similar between two sets of OPA activities. The findings also indicate the importance of learning environments in fostering SCL in EMI contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Airey, J. (2016). EAP, EMI or CLIL? In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 71–83). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657455
Basturkmen, H., & Shackleford, N. (2015). How content lecturers help students with language: An observational study of language-related episodes in interaction in first year accounting classrooms. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.08.001
Botha, W., Bolton, K., & Bacon-Shone, J. (2022). EMI in Singapore’s major universities. World Englishes. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12624.
Buchanan, M. T., & Stern, J. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the benefits of peer review. Journal of Education for Teaching, 38(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2012.643654
Chang, L. Y.-H. (2007). The influences of group processes on learners’ autonomous beliefs and behaviors. System, 35(3), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.03.001
Chang, C. Y.-H. (2015). Teacher modelling on EFL reviewers’ audience-aware feedback and affectivity in L2 peer review. Assessing Writing, 25, 2–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.04.001
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
Costa, F. (2012). Focus on form in ICLHE lectures in Italy. Evidence from English-medium science lectures by native speakers of Italian. AILA Review, 25, 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.25.03cos
Curle, S., Jablonkai, R. R., Mittelmeier, J., Sahan, K., & Veitch, A. (2021). Part 1: Literature review. In N. Galloway (Ed.), English in higher education – English medium. British Council.
Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2012). Future challenges for English-medium instruction at the tertiary level. In A. Doiz, D. Lasagabaster, & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges (pp. 213–221). Multilingual Matters.
Evans, S., & Morrison, B. (2011). Meeting the challenges of English-medium higher education: The first-year experience in Hong Kong. English for Specific Purposes, 30(3), 198–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.01.001
Gholami, H. (2016). Self assessment and learner autonomy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(1), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0601.06
Hellekjaer, G. O. (2006). Screening criteria for English-medium programmes: A case study. In R. Wilkinson, V. Zegers, & C. van Leeuwen (Eds.), Bridging the assessment gap in English-medium higher education (pp. 43–60). Maastricht University.
Hu, G. (2019). English-medium instruction in higher education: Lessons from China. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.1.1.1
Khalilzadeh, J., & Tasci, A. D. A. (2017). Large sample size, significance level, and the effect size: Solutions to perils of using big data for academic research. Tourism Management, 62, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.03.026
Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centred learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Education Technology Research and Development, 64, 707–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9422-5
Lee, A. S., Randall, J. B., & da Costa, M. G. (2023). Simplifying texts for easier comprehension in an introductory computer science course: An evaluation of Rewordify. In J. Corbett, E. Yan, J. Yeoh, J. & J. Lee (Eds.), Teaching with technology in English medium instruction universities in multilingual China. Springer Nature.
Liu, X., Li, L., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Small group discussion as a key component in online assessment training for enhanced student learning in web-based peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1324018
Liu, J., Guo, X., Gao, R., Fram, P., Ling, Y., Zhang, H., & Wang, J. (2019). Students’ learning outcomes and peer rating accuracy in compulsory and voluntary online peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(6), 835–847. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1542659
Lu, Q., Zhu, X., & Cheong, C. M. (2021). Understanding the difference between self-feedback and peer feedback: A comparative study of their effects on undergraduate students’ writing improvement. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.739962
Man, D., Xu, Y., & O’Toole, J. M. (2018). Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: A case study in a Chinese university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(4), 527–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1376310
McLaughlin, E., & Parkinson, J. (2018). ‘We learn as we go’: How acquisition of a technical vocabulary is supported during vocational training. English for Specific Purposes, 50, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.003
Moodle Docs. (2021). Workshop activity. https://docs.moodle.org/311/en/Workshop_activity
Mostert, M., & Snowball, J. D. (2013). Where angels fear to tread: Online peer-assessment in a large first-year class. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 674–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.683770
Murdoch, Y. (2021). Applying ambitious instruction in EMI university classes. Korea TESOL Journal, 17(1), 85–108.
Nam, H. (2019). The effect of flipped learning using multimedia on learners’ academic achievement, intercultural competence, and autonomy. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 22(3), 84–101. https://doi.org/10.15702/mall.2019.22.3.84
O’Dowd, R. (2018). The training and accreditation of teachers for English medium instruction: An overview of practice in European universities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 553–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1491945
Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2016). Understanding the effects of receiving peer feedback for text revision: Relations between author and reviewer ability. Journal of Writing Research, 8(2), 227–265. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.08.02.03
Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C. A., & Schunn, C. D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41, 381–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9236-3
Patchan, M. M., Schunn, C. D., & Correnti, R. J. (2016). The nature of feedback: How peer feedback features affect students’ implementation rate and quality of revisions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(8), 1098–1120. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000103
Pessoa, S., Miller, R., & Kaufer, D. (2014). Students’ challenges and development in the transition to academic writing at an English-medium university in Qatar. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52(2), 127–156. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2014-0006
Rose, H., McKinley, J., Xu, X., & Zhou, S. (2020). Investigating policy and implementation of English-medium instruction in higher education institutions in China: A report by EMI Oxford Research Group in collaboration with the British Council in China. British Council.
Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. J. (2007). Scaffolding in technology-enhanced learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820600996972
Snodin, N. S. (2013). The effects of blended learning with a CMS on the development of autonomous learning: A case study of different degrees of autonomy achieved by individual learners. Computers & Education, 61, 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.004
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58
Wilkinson, R. (2012). English-medium instruction at a Dutch University: Challenges and pitfalls. In A. Doiz, D. Lasagabaster, & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges (pp. 3–24). Multilingual Matters.
Wong, K. M. (2021). “A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centred learning: Own it, learn it, and share it” by Lee and Hannafin (2016): An international perspective. Education Technology Research and Development, 69, 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09842-w
Yan, E. M. Y. (2021, April 12). Chinese university students’ perceptions of faculty technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), technology integration, and level of autonomous learning. Paper presented at the 2021 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). AERA Online Paper Repository. https://doi.org/10.3102/1681227.
Yan, E. M. Y. (2022). Using online peer assessment activities to enhance team collaboration in two undergraduate courses. Innovative Teaching and Learning, 4(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.4208/itl.20220104
Yan, E. M. Y., & Qin, C. (2021). Towards a principled approach to blended learning: Investigating Moodle-based English-medium classes for Chinese university students. Innovative Teaching and Learning, 3(1), 36–68. https://doi.org/10.4208/itl.20210003
Yeoh, J. (2022). Using videos to promote active learning in teaching listening skills. Innovative Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 102–114. https://doi.org/10.4208/itl.20210206
Yu, S., Wang, Y., Jiang, L., & Wang, B. (2021). Coping with EMI: Mainland China students’ strategies at a university in Macau. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(4), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1784248
Yuan, R., Li, M., Peng, J., & Qiu, X. (2022). English-medium instruction (EMI) teachers as ‘curriculum makers’ in Chinese higher education: A textual analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2061268.
Zhou, L., & Ito, H. (2011). English language education and assessment in China. Research Bulletin of Naruto University of Education, 26, 288–296. https://doi.org/10.24727/00027781
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by Guangdong University Innovation and Enhancement Project with the number R5201812.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix A
Details of the Autonomous Learning (AL) Scale, and Its Internal Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha), Scale Scores (Mean Item Scores) and Single-item Scores from the Pre-intervention (N = 66) and Post-intervention (N = 63) Surveys
AL Scale a | Single-item score (S.D.) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Source | Item | Pre-intervention (α = .92) | Post-intervention (α = .93) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 1. I set up my own learning goals in this course. 我在这门课中訂定了自己的学习目标。 | 5.18 (1.41) | 5.29 (1.20) |
Adapted from Gholami (2016) | 2. I know my own weaknesses in this course and go for it. 我了解自己在这门课中的弱点，并为此而尽力去做。 | 5.29 (1.20) | 5.52 (1.09) |
Adapted from Gholami (2016) | 3. I know how I learn this course the best. 我知道我如何学习这门课是最好的。 | 4.53 (1.50) | 4.75 (1.33) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 4. I decide what to learn about this course outside the classroom. 我自行决定在课堂外学习这门课的哪些内容。 | 4.88 (1.49) | 5.16 (1.27) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 5. I stimulate my own interest in learning this course. 我增进了自己对学习这门课的兴趣。 | 4.56 (1.62) | 5.08 (1.40) |
Adapted from Gholami (2016) | 6. I enjoy learning the topics of this course on my own. 我喜爱独自学习这门课的课题。 | 4.14 (1.78) | 4.83 (1.55) |
Adapted from Nam (2019) | 7. I do extra study beyond the class materials in this course. 除了这门课的课堂材料外，我还在做额外的相关学习。 | 4.09 (1.75) | 4.57 (1.50) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 8. I learn from my peers, not just from my teacher, in this course. 在这门课中，我向我的同学学习，而不仅仅是从我的老师那里学习。 | 5.27 (1.32) | 5.75 (1.12) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 9. I discover knowledge about this course on my own, rather than waiting for knowledge from my teacher. 我自行发掘关于这门课的知识，而不是等待老师传授知识。 | 4.36 (1.57) | 4.83 (1.49) |
Adapted from Nam (2019) | 10. Evaluation and feedback on my errors in this course are not only from my teacher, but also from me. 关于我在这门课中所犯错误的评价和反馈，不仅来自我的老师，也来自我自己。 | 5.11 (1.34) | 5.46 (1.20) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 11. I offer opinions to my teacher on the learning materials for this course. 我向我的老师提供关于这门课学习材料的意见。 | 3.20 (1.83) | 3.92 (1.94) |
Adapted from Chang (2007) | 12. I offer opinions to my teacher on what to learn in the classroom of this course. 我向我的老师提供关于这门课学习材料的意见。 | 3.17 (1.75) | 4.05 (1.84) |
Mean item score ( S.D. ) | 4.81 (1.14) | 4.93 (1.07) | |
Appendix B
1.1 Examples of Identifying the Amount of Writing for the Selected Sub-tasks (Figs. B1 & B2)
Example of writing for the selected sub-task of Assignment 2 in Course RS
Note: The parts of writing that address specifically the sub-task question is highlighted in grey. There are two clauses (main and subordinate clauses) for the third source not being highlighted because this part of information is repeating what is mentioned afterward.
Average number of highlighted words in the writing per source = (79 + 92 + 46)/3 = 72.33
Average total words in the writing per source = (79 + 92 + 68)/3 = 79.67
Example of writing for the selected sub-task of Analysis 1 in Course DG
Note: The part of writing that addresses specifically the sub-task instruction is highlighted in grey. There are four clauses (main and subordinate clauses) not being highlighted because they are about the common usage of the two synonymous verbs.
Number of highlighted words in the writing = 14
Total number of words in the writing = 44
Appendix C
1.1 Examples of Identifying the Amount of Feedback Focus for the Selected Aspects of Assessment (Figs. C1 & C2)
Example of peer feedback for the selected aspects of assessment for Assignment 2 in Course RS
Note: The parts of feedback that are problem comments or solution comments and that address specifically Aspect 1, Aspect 2, and Aspect 3 of assessment are highlighted in grey. The parts of feedback that are not highlighted are either summary comments or praise comments.
Average number of highlighted words in the feedback per assessee = (95 + 0 + 82)/3 = 59
Average total words in the feedback per assessee = (114 + 36 + 86)/3 = 78.67
Example of peer feedback for the selected aspects of assessment for Analysis 1 in Course DG
Note: The parts of feedback that are problem comments or solution comments and that address specifically Aspect 3 of assessment are highlighted in grey. The parts of feedback that are not highlighted are praise comments.
Average number of highlighted words in the feedback per assessee = (21 + 0 + 56 + 77)/4 = 38.5
Average total words in the feedback per assessee = (36 + 9 + 58 + 82)/4 = 46.25
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Yan, E.M.Y. (2023). Using Online Peer Assessment Activities to Foster Student-Centred Learning in Two Undergraduate EMI Courses. In: Corbett, J., Yan, E.M., Yeoh, J., Lee, J. (eds) Multilingual Education Yearbook 2023. Multilingual Education Yearbook. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32811-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32811-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32810-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32811-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)