1
Enhancing Eloquence in Speaking through Peer Feedback: A Study on Gifted Students
in Vietnamese Public High Schools
Abstract
This study investigates the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in enhancing the speaking skills of gifted
students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. Traditional English teaching methods often
overlook speaking skills, especially for gifted students. The study involved 40 to 50 students participating in
peer feedback sessions over one semester, using a mixed-methods design. Quantitative findings showed
significant improvements in fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary, and overall eloquence, with
students also reporting increased confidence. Qualitative data highlighted enhanced engagement, critical
thinking, and self-awareness, though challenges included variability in feedback quality and peer dynamics.
Recommendations include ongoing training, structured guidelines for feedback, and strategies to manage peer
dynamics. This study demonstrates that peer feedback can effectively improve speaking skills and confidence
in a supportive, low-cost, and sustainable manner, providing valuable insights for educators in similar contexts.
Keywords: Peer feedback, speaking skills, gifted students, English education, Vietnam, resource-limited
settings.
I. Introduction
A. Background and Rationale
Eloquence in speaking is a critical skill for academic and professional success, enabling individuals to
articulate their thoughts clearly and persuasively. For gifted students, who often exhibit advanced cognitive
abilities and a heightened capacity for abstract thinking, developing strong speaking skills is particularly
important. Eloquence not only enhances their academic performance but also prepares them for future
leadership roles where effective communication is paramount.
In Vietnam, English is increasingly recognized as a vital tool for global integration and professional
advancement. However, public high schools often face significant challenges in providing quality English
education, particularly in resource-limited settings. These challenges include large class sizes, limited access
to
educational
resources,
and
insufficient
training
for
teachers
in
modern
pedagogical
techniques.
Consequently, opportunities for students to practice and refine their speaking skills are often inadequate
(Hoang, 2018; Tran, 2015).
Gifted
students,
despite
their
advanced
abilities,
are
not
immune
to
these
challenges.
They
require
differentiated instruction that goes beyond the standard curriculum to meet their unique learning needs.
Traditional methods of teaching English may not fully engage these students or harness their potential, leading
to a gap in their development of eloquent speaking skills (Harris, 2015).
Peer feedback has emerged as a promising strategy to enhance speaking skills, leveraging the collective
insights and support of fellow students. This approach involves structured feedback sessions where students
evaluate each other’s performances based on predefined criteria, providing constructive criticism and
encouragement. Peer feedback not only promotes active learning but also fosters a collaborative learning
environment, which can be particularly beneficial in resource-constrained settings (Liu & Carless, 2006).
Implementing a peer feedback system in Vietnamese public high schools offers a practical solution to the
challenges faced by educators and students. It allows for the optimization of existing resources by creating
opportunities for students to practice speaking and receive feedback without the need for extensive additional
resources. Moreover, peer feedback can enhance students’ confidence, critical thinking, and ability to
articulate ideas effectively, contributing to their overall language proficiency and eloquence (Gielen et al.,
2010).
This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in improving the speaking skills
of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school setting in Vietnam. By evaluating the impact of
peer feedback on students’ eloquence, confidence, and communication skills, the research seeks to provide
valuable insights and practical recommendations for educators striving to enhance English education in similar
contexts.
B. Research Problem
Despite the critical importance of eloquence in speaking for academic and professional success, public high
schools in Vietnam, particularly those with limited resources, face significant challenges in providing effective
2
instruction and practice opportunities for students. Gifted students, who possess advanced cognitive abilities
and potential, require specialized and differentiated instruction to fully develop their speaking skills. However,
the current educational environment often falls short in addressing these needs, leading to a gap in the
development of eloquent speaking abilities among gifted students (Harris, 2015).
The traditional methods of teaching English in Vietnamese public high schools are primarily focused on
grammar, reading, and writing, with insufficient emphasis on speaking and listening skills (Hoang, 2018;
Nguyen & Le, 2019). This imbalance is exacerbated by large class sizes, limited access to educational
resources, and a lack of specialized training for teachers in modern, interactive pedagogical techniques (Tran,
2015). As a result, students, including those who are gifted, have limited opportunities to practice speaking in
meaningful and engaging contexts, hindering their ability to develop confidence and eloquence (Nguyen,
2017).
Moreover, the existing curriculum does not adequately cater to the unique learning needs of gifted students,
who often require faster-paced instruction, more complex and challenging activities, and opportunities for
self-expression and critical thinking (Pham, 2013). Without these tailored instructional approaches, gifted
students may not fully realize their potential in speaking and may become disengaged or under-stimulated
(Harris, 2015).
Given these challenges, there is a pressing need to explore innovative and practical solutions to enhance the
speaking skills of gifted students in resource-limited settings. Peer feedback has emerged as a promising
strategy, leveraging the collective insights and support of students to provide constructive criticism and
encouragement (Liu & Carless, 2006). However, the effectiveness of this approach in the context of
Vietnamese public high schools remains under-researched.
This study seeks to address this gap by investigating the impact of structured peer feedback on the
development of eloquence in speaking among gifted students in a Vietnamese public high school with limited
resources. By examining how peer feedback influences students' speaking skills, confidence, and overall
communication abilities, this research aims to provide actionable insights and practical recommendations for
educators. The findings will contribute to the broader understanding of effective strategies for enhancing
English education for gifted students in similar resource-constrained environments.
C. Research Objectives
The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in enhancing
the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school setting in Vietnam. By focusing
on this primary goal, the study aims to achieve several specific objectives that will contribute to a
comprehensive understanding of the impact and potential benefits of peer feedback in developing eloquence
in speaking.
1.
Assessing Improvement in Speaking Skills:
o
Objective: To measure the improvement in speaking skills of gifted students as a result of
participating in structured peer feedback sessions.
o
Rationale: Understanding the extent to which peer feedback can enhance speaking abilities
will provide valuable insights into its efficacy as a pedagogical tool (Gielen et al., 2010).
2.
Evaluating Changes in Student Confidence:
o
Objective: To evaluate changes in the confidence levels of gifted students when speaking in
public or classroom settings before and after the intervention.
o
Rationale: Confidence is a crucial component of eloquent speaking. This objective aims to
determine whether peer feedback can help reduce speaking anxiety and increase self-assurance
(Rollinson, 2005).
3.
Exploring Perceptions of Peer Feedback:
o
Objective: To explore the perceptions of both students and teachers regarding the use of peer
feedback as a method for improving speaking skills.
o
Rationale: Understanding the attitudes and experiences of participants will provide deeper
insights into the practical implementation and acceptance of peer feedback in the classroom
(Liu & Carless, 2006).
4.
Identifying Challenges and Benefits:
o
Objective: To identify the specific challenges and benefits experienced by students and
teachers during the implementation of the peer feedback system.
3
o
Rationale: Recognizing the obstacles and advantages will help in refining the approach and
making necessary adjustments to maximize the effectiveness of peer feedback (Falchikov &
Goldfinch, 2000).
5.
Providing Practical Recommendations:
o
Objective: To develop practical recommendations for educators on how to effectively
implement structured peer feedback in resource-limited settings.
o
Rationale: The ultimate goal is to offer actionable guidance that can be readily adopted by
other schools facing similar resource constraints, thereby improving the quality of English
education for gifted students (Nguyen, 2017).
By addressing these objectives, the study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge on effective strategies
for enhancing speaking skills among gifted students, particularly in contexts where resources are limited. The
findings will offer valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and researchers seeking to improve English
language instruction and foster eloquence in speaking among gifted learners.
D. Research Questions
To achieve the objectives of this study and provide a comprehensive understanding of the impact of structured
peer feedback on the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam,
the following research questions and sub-questions will guide the investigation:
1.
How does structured peer feedback influence the speaking skills of gifted students?
o
Purpose: To determine the extent to which peer feedback sessions enhance the clarity, fluency,
and overall eloquence of students’ spoken English.
o
Sub-questions:
§
What specific aspects of speaking skills show the most improvement after the
intervention?
§
How do the students' speaking performances in peer-reviewed sessions compare to
those in traditional classroom settings?
o
Rationale: Previous studies have shown that peer feedback can significantly improve various
language skills, including speaking (Gielen et al., 2010; Liu & Carless, 2006).
2.
What is the effect of peer feedback on the confidence levels of gifted students when speaking in
public or classroom settings?
o
Purpose: To evaluate whether participation in peer feedback sessions helps reduce speaking
anxiety and boost self-confidence.
o
Sub-questions:
§
How do students’ self-reported confidence levels change over the course of the
intervention?
§
Are there observable differences in the confidence levels of students during speaking
activities before and after the peer feedback intervention?
o
Rationale: Confidence is a critical factor in effective speaking, and peer feedback has been
shown to enhance students' confidence by providing a supportive and collaborative learning
environment (Rollinson, 2005).
3.
What are the perceptions of gifted students and their teachers regarding the use of peer feedback
to improve speaking skills?
o
Purpose: To gather qualitative insights into the acceptability and perceived value of peer
feedback from the perspectives of both students and educators.
o
Sub-questions:
§
How do students describe their experiences with giving and receiving peer feedback?
§
What are teachers’ views on the effectiveness and practicality of incorporating peer
feedback into their teaching practices?
o
Rationale: Understanding participants' attitudes and experiences can inform the practical
implementation and refinement of peer feedback systems (Liu & Carless, 2006).
4.
What challenges and benefits do students and teachers encounter during the implementation of
the peer feedback system?
o
Purpose: To identify the practical obstacles and advantages encountered during the peer
feedback process, providing a balanced view of its implementation.
4
o
Sub-questions:
§
What specific difficulties do students face when providing and receiving feedback?
§
What logistical or pedagogical challenges do teachers encounter when facilitating peer
feedback sessions?
o
Rationale: Recognizing the specific challenges and benefits can help in improving the
effectiveness of peer feedback systems and ensuring their sustainability in resource-limited
settings (Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000).
5.
What practical recommendations can be derived from the study for implementing structured
peer feedback in resource-limited settings?
o
Purpose: To develop actionable guidelines and best practices based on the study’s findings
that can be applied in similar educational contexts.
o
Sub-questions:
§
What adjustments or supports are necessary to maximize the effectiveness of peer
feedback?
§
How can the peer feedback process be streamlined to fit within the constraints of
resource-limited schools?
o
Rationale: Providing clear and practical recommendations can assist educators in adopting and
adapting peer feedback systems to enhance English language education for gifted students
(Nguyen, 2017).
Addressing these research questions and sub-questions serves the aim of the study to provide a detailed and
nuanced understanding of the role of peer feedback in enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students. The
findings will contribute valuable knowledge to the field of English language education and offer practical
solutions for educators working in similar resource-constrained environments.
II. Literature Review
A. Importance of Speaking Skills in Language Learning
Speaking skills are a critical component of language proficiency, encompassing the ability to articulate
thoughts, convey information clearly, and engage in meaningful communication. In the context of language
learning, the development of speaking skills is essential for several reasons.
First, speaking is fundamental to effective communication. It enables learners to express their ideas, opinions,
and emotions, facilitating interaction and collaboration in both academic and social settings. According to
Brown and Yule (1983), speaking is one of the most essential language skills because it directly involves the
process of constructing and conveying meaning in real-time, which is a key aspect of language use in everyday
life.
Second, speaking skills contribute significantly to academic success. In educational environments, students
frequently engage in activities that require oral communication, such as presentations, debates, and group
discussions. Proficiency in speaking enhances their ability to participate actively and confidently in these
activities, thereby improving their overall academic performance. Luoma (2004) emphasizes that effective
speaking skills are not only crucial for language tests but also for the broader educational outcomes, as they
enable students to demonstrate their knowledge and critical thinking abilities verbally.
Third, speaking skills are closely linked to cognitive development. The process of planning and organizing
speech requires higher-order thinking skills, including analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. These cognitive
processes are integral to problem-solving and decision-making, which are essential competencies in both
academic and real-world contexts. Vygotsky (1986) highlights the role of speech in cognitive development,
arguing that language is a primary tool for thought and that the development of speaking skills fosters
intellectual growth.
Furthermore, for gifted students, the development of speaking skills is particularly important. Gifted students
often exhibit advanced cognitive abilities and a heightened capacity for abstract thinking, making eloquence
in speaking a vital skill for articulating complex ideas and engaging in sophisticated discourse. As Harris
(2015) notes, gifted students' advanced language abilities necessitate tailored instructional approaches that
challenge and stimulate their intellectual and communicative potential.
The significance of speaking skills extends beyond the classroom. In the professional realm, effective
communication is a highly valued competency. Employers consistently rank verbal communication skills as
one of the most important attributes for career success (Robles, 2012). Professionals who can speak eloquently
5
are better equipped to lead, negotiate, and collaborate, making speaking skills indispensable for career
advancement and leadership.
Despite its importance, speaking is often the least practiced language skill in educational settings, particularly
in resource-limited environments. Traditional language instruction tends to focus more on reading and writing,
with less emphasis on speaking and listening (Richards, 2008). This imbalance can hinder the comprehensive
language development of students, particularly those who are gifted and require more advanced and engaging
speaking opportunities to thrive.
In summary, the importance of speaking skills in language learning cannot be overstated. They are crucial for
effective communication, academic success, cognitive development, and professional achievement. For gifted
students, in particular, the development of eloquence in speaking is essential for realizing their full potential.
Therefore, innovative and practical strategies, such as peer feedback, are needed to enhance speaking
instruction, especially in resource-limited educational settings.
B. Peer Feedback in Education
Peer feedback, also known as peer assessment or peer review, is an educational practice where students
evaluate each other’s work and provide constructive feedback. This approach leverages the collective insights
of peers to enhance learning outcomes and is widely recognized for its benefits in various educational contexts,
including language learning. The literature on peer feedback highlights its effectiveness in improving student
performance, fostering critical thinking, and promoting active engagement.
1. Definition and Types of Peer Feedback
Peer feedback involves students assessing the work of their classmates based on predefined criteria. This
process can take multiple forms, including written comments, oral feedback, and structured peer evaluation
forms. Topping (1998) categorizes peer feedback into formative and summative types. Formative peer
feedback aims to provide constructive criticism during the learning process to help students improve, while
summative peer feedback involves evaluation at the end of an instructional period to assess learning outcomes.
2. Benefits of Peer Feedback in Language Learning
Several studies have demonstrated the benefits of peer feedback in language learning, particularly in
developing speaking skills. One of the primary advantages is that it encourages active learning. As Liu and
Carless (2006) argue, peer feedback engages students in the learning process by requiring them to critically
evaluate their peers' work and reflect on their own performance. This active involvement helps students
internalize language concepts and improve their speaking abilities.
Peer feedback also fosters a collaborative learning environment. By participating in feedback sessions,
students develop a sense of community and mutual support. This collaborative atmosphere can reduce
speaking anxiety, as students feel more comfortable practicing speaking skills among peers rather than in front
of teachers or larger audiences (Rollinson, 2005). Additionally, the social interaction inherent in peer feedback
sessions provides authentic opportunities for using language in meaningful contexts, which is crucial for
language acquisition.
Another significant benefit is the development of critical thinking and self-assessment skills. When students
evaluate their peers' work, they learn to apply assessment criteria critically and identify strengths and
weaknesses. This practice not only enhances their evaluative skills but also helps them become more aware
of their own learning processes and areas for improvement (Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000). This metacognitive
awareness is particularly valuable for gifted students, who often benefit from higher-order thinking activities.
3. Previous Studies on Peer Feedback and Speaking Skills
Research on peer feedback has consistently shown positive effects on speaking skills. For instance, a study by
Gielen, Peeters, Dochy, Onghena, and Struyven (2010) found that peer feedback significantly improved
students' speaking performance in terms of fluency, coherence, and accuracy. The study highlighted that
students
who
received
detailed,
formative
feedback
from
their
peers
were
able
to
make
substantial
improvements in subsequent speaking tasks.
Similarly, a study by Saito and Fujita (2004) demonstrated that peer feedback enhanced the speaking
proficiency of English language learners by providing diverse perspectives and specific suggestions for
improvement. The researchers noted that peer feedback sessions allowed students to engage in meaningful
communication and practice their speaking skills in a supportive environment, leading to increased confidence
and better performance.
4. Challenges and Considerations
6
Despite its benefits, peer feedback also presents several challenges that need to be addressed for successful
implementation. One common issue is the variability in the quality of feedback provided by peers. Students
may lack the expertise or confidence to give constructive and accurate feedback, which can limit the
effectiveness of the process (Nicol, Thomson, & Breslin, 2014). To mitigate this, it is essential to provide
students with clear guidelines, training, and support on how to give and receive feedback effectively.
Another challenge is the potential for social dynamics to influence feedback. Peer feedback can be affected
by friendship biases, reluctance to criticize peers, or power imbalances within the group. These factors can
impact the authenticity and usefulness of the feedback provided (Topping, 2010). Strategies such as
anonymous feedback, rotating feedback partners, and creating a positive classroom culture that values
constructive criticism can help address these issues.
5. Relevance to the Vietnamese Educational Context
In the context of Vietnamese public high schools, where resources are often limited, peer feedback offers a
practical and cost-effective strategy to enhance speaking skills. The collaborative nature of peer feedback
aligns
well
with
the
cultural
emphasis
on
community
and
collective
effort
in
Vietnamese
society.
Implementing peer feedback can create additional opportunities for students to practice speaking English in
meaningful ways, despite the constraints of large class sizes and limited access to native English speakers or
advanced technological resources.
C. Context of English Education in Vietnam
The landscape of English education in Vietnam has undergone significant changes over the past few decades,
driven by the country's increasing integration into the global economy and the recognition of English as a
critical skill for academic and professional success. Despite these advancements, several challenges persist,
particularly in resource-limited public high schools. This section examines the current state of English
education in Vietnam, the specific challenges faced by educators and students, and the relevance of peer
feedback in this context.
1. Overview of English Language Teaching in Vietnamese Public High Schools
English is a mandatory subject in Vietnamese public schools, with the government emphasizing its importance
from primary through secondary education. The national curriculum focuses on developing students'
proficiency in the four key language skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. However, despite these
efforts, the quality of English education varies significantly across the country, particularly between urban
and rural areas.
Urban schools, especially those in major cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, often have better resources,
more qualified teachers, and access to supplementary educational materials. In contrast, rural and remote
schools face significant challenges, including limited access to qualified English teachers, inadequate teaching
materials, and large class sizes (Tran, 2015). These disparities contribute to varying levels of English
proficiency among students nationwide.
2. Challenges in Teaching English in Resource-Limited Settings
Several factors contribute to the difficulties in providing high-quality English education in resource-limited
Vietnamese public high schools:
•
Teacher Qualifications and Training: Many English teachers in Vietnam, particularly in rural areas,
lack advanced training in modern pedagogical methods. This gap in professional development limits
their ability to implement interactive and student-centered teaching practices effectively (Nguyen,
2017).
•
Class Sizes: Large class sizes are common in public high schools, making it challenging for teachers
to provide individualized attention and engage students in meaningful speaking activities. With limited
opportunities for personalized feedback, students may struggle to improve their speaking skills (Le,
2011).
•
Teaching Materials and Resources: Access to up-to-date textbooks, audio-visual aids, and other
teaching materials is often restricted in resource-limited schools. Without these resources, it is difficult
to create an immersive and interactive language learning environment (Hoang, 2018).
•
Emphasis
on
Examination:
The
Vietnamese
education
system
places
a
strong
emphasis
on
examination results, which often leads to a focus on grammar and reading skills at the expense of
speaking and listening skills. Teachers may prioritize test preparation over communicative language
teaching, resulting in students having limited opportunities to practice speaking (Pham, 2013).
7
3. Importance of Speaking Skills in Vietnamese Context
In the context of Vietnam's rapid economic development and integration into the global economy, English-
speaking skills have become increasingly important. Proficiency in English opens up numerous opportunities
for higher education, employment, and international collaboration. For gifted students, in particular, the ability
to speak English eloquently can significantly enhance their academic and career prospects.
Moreover, as Vietnam continues to attract foreign investment and international partnerships, the demand for
professionals with strong English communication skills is growing. Employers in various sectors, including
business, technology, and tourism, prioritize candidates who can effectively communicate in English.
Therefore, improving the speaking skills of Vietnamese students is essential to meet the demands of the
modern workforce (Nguyen & Le, 2019).
4. Relevance of Peer Feedback in Vietnamese Educational Context
Given the challenges and the importance of speaking skills, peer feedback emerges as a particularly relevant
and practical strategy for enhancing English education in Vietnam, especially in resource-limited settings. The
collaborative nature of peer feedback aligns well with the cultural emphasis on community and collective
effort in Vietnamese society. It offers a cost-effective way to provide additional practice opportunities and
personalized feedback without requiring significant additional resources.
Peer feedback can help address some of the key challenges in Vietnamese public high schools:
•
Mitigating Large Class Sizes: By involving students in the feedback process, peer feedback can
alleviate some of the burdens on teachers, allowing for more individualized attention and constructive
criticism (Nguyen, 2017).
•
Enhancing Engagement and Motivation: Engaging students in peer feedback can increase their
motivation and active participation in speaking activities. This interactive approach can make language
learning more dynamic and enjoyable (Tran, 2015).
•
Promoting Critical Thinking and Self-Assessment: Peer feedback encourages students to critically
evaluate their peers' performances and reflect on their own, fostering critical thinking and self-
assessment skills that are essential for language development (Saito & Fujita, 2004).
•
Building Confidence and Reducing Anxiety: Providing and receiving feedback from peers can create
a supportive environment that helps reduce speaking anxiety and build confidence, which are crucial
for developing eloquence in speaking (Rollinson, 2005).
To sum up, the context of English education in Vietnam presents unique challenges that necessitate innovative
and practical solutions. Peer feedback offers a promising approach to enhance speaking skills among gifted
students in resource-limited public high schools. By leveraging the strengths of peer collaboration and
providing meaningful practice opportunities, peer feedback can contribute significantly to improving English
language education in Vietnam.
III. Methodology
A. Research Design
This study employs a mixed-methods research design, combining both quantitative and qualitative approaches
to comprehensively investigate the impact of structured peer feedback on the speaking skills of gifted students
in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. The mixed-methods approach allows for a robust analysis
of both the measurable improvements in speaking skills and the nuanced experiences and perceptions of
students and teachers involved in the intervention.
1. Quantitative Approach
The quantitative component of the study focuses on measuring the improvement in speaking skills among
gifted students before and after the implementation of the peer feedback intervention. This approach involves
pre- and post-intervention assessments to provide objective data on the efficacy of the peer feedback system.
•
Pre-Intervention Assessment: At the beginning of the study, students will participate in a baseline
speaking assessment. This assessment will evaluate various aspects of their speaking skills, including
fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. The assessment will be
conducted using a standardized speaking test and recorded for subsequent analysis.
•
Intervention: Over the course of a semester, students will engage in structured peer feedback sessions
as part of their regular English classes. These sessions will involve students giving and receiving
feedback on their speaking performances based on specific criteria. Each session will be guided by a
feedback rubric designed to help students provide constructive and focused feedback.
8
•
Post-Intervention Assessment: At the end of the semester, students will undergo a final speaking
assessment
similar
to
the
pre-intervention
assessment.
This
assessment
will
measure
any
improvements in their speaking skills and allow for a comparison with their baseline performance.
•
Data Analysis: The pre- and post-intervention assessment scores will be statistically analyzed to
determine the significance of any observed improvements. Paired sample t-tests will be used to
compare the means of the pre- and post-assessment scores, and effect sizes will be calculated to gauge
the magnitude of the intervention's impact.
2. Qualitative Approach
The qualitative component of the study aims to explore the experiences, perceptions, and challenges
encountered by students and teachers during the peer feedback process. This approach involves collecting and
analyzing qualitative data through various methods to provide a deeper understanding of the intervention's
effectiveness and practical implications.
•
Student Surveys and Questionnaires: Throughout the semester, students will complete surveys and
questionnaires designed to capture their attitudes toward peer feedback, their perceived improvements
in speaking skills, and any challenges they face during the feedback sessions. These instruments will
include both closed-ended and open-ended questions to gather comprehensive data.
•
Teacher Interviews: In-depth interviews will be conducted with the teachers facilitating the peer
feedback sessions. These interviews will explore teachers' perspectives on the effectiveness of the
intervention, the feasibility of implementing peer feedback in resource-limited settings, and any
observed changes in students' speaking skills and confidence.
•
Classroom Observations: The researcher will conduct periodic classroom observations to document
the dynamics of the peer feedback sessions, student engagement, and the overall implementation
process. Detailed field notes will be taken during these observations to capture the contextual factors
influencing the intervention.
•
Focus Groups: At the end of the semester, focus group discussions will be held with groups of students
to delve deeper into their experiences with peer feedback. These discussions will provide an
opportunity for students to share their insights, discuss any challenges, and suggest improvements for
future implementations.
•
Data Analysis: Qualitative data from surveys, interviews, observations, and focus groups will be
analyzed using thematic analysis. This process involves coding the data to identify recurring themes
and patterns, which will be used to interpret the overall findings and draw conclusions about the
intervention's impact.
3. Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Data
The mixed-methods design allows for the integration of quantitative and qualitative data to provide a
comprehensive evaluation of the peer feedback intervention. The quantitative data will offer objective
measures of improvement in speaking skills, while the qualitative data will provide contextual insights and a
deeper understanding of the students' and teachers' experiences.
By triangulating these data sources, the study aims to present a well-rounded analysis of the effectiveness of
structured peer feedback in enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students. This integrated approach will also
help identify best practices and practical recommendations for implementing peer feedback in similar
resource-limited educational settings.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval will be obtained from the relevant institutional review board before the study begins.
Informed consent will be sought from all participants, including students and teachers. Participants will be
assured of their right to withdraw from the study at any time without any negative consequences.
Confidentiality and anonymity will be maintained throughout the research process, with data being securely
stored and accessible only to the research team.
By employing this comprehensive research design, the study aims to contribute valuable insights into the
potential of peer feedback as a strategy for improving speaking skills among gifted students in Vietnam,
particularly in resource-limited public high schools.
B. Participants
The success of this study hinges on the careful selection and engagement of participants who are representative
of the target population: gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. This section
9
details the criteria for selecting participants, their demographic characteristics, and the process for recruiting
and engaging them in the study.
1. Selection Criteria for Gifted Students
Gifted students will be selected based on specific criteria to ensure that the study accurately reflects the needs
and abilities of this group. The criteria include:
•
Academic Performance: Students must have consistently high academic performance, particularly in
English and other language arts subjects, as evidenced by their grades and teacher recommendations.
•
Cognitive Abilities: Students must demonstrate advanced cognitive abilities, which may be assessed
through standardized tests or evaluations conducted by the school’s gifted program.
•
Motivation and Engagement: Students must show a keen interest in improving their English speaking
skills and a willingness to participate actively in peer feedback sessions.
These criteria will help ensure that the participants are genuinely gifted and have the potential to benefit from
and contribute to the study.
2. Demographic Details and Sample Size
The study will involve a sample of 40 to 50 gifted students from a public high school in a provincial area of
Vietnam. This sample size is chosen to balance the need for statistical power in the quantitative analyses and
the feasibility of conducting in-depth qualitative investigations.
•
Age Range: Participants will be in grades 10 to 12, typically ranging from 15 to 18 years old. This age
group is appropriate for examining the development of speaking skills and the impact of peer feedback
in a high school setting.
•
Gender Balance: Efforts will be made to ensure a balanced representation of both male and female
students to examine any potential gender differences in the effectiveness of peer feedback.
•
Socioeconomic Background: Given the resource-limited setting, participants will likely come from
diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. This diversity will provide insights into how peer feedback can
be tailored to meet the needs of students from various economic contexts.
3. Recruitment Process
The recruitment process will involve several steps to ensure the selection of suitable participants and their
informed consent:
•
Collaboration
with
School
Administration:
The
researcher
will
collaborate
with
the
school
administration and the teachers of the gifted program to identify potential participants who meet the
selection criteria. This collaboration will also help secure administrative support for the study.
•
Information Sessions: Information sessions will be held with potential participants and their parents
or guardians to explain the study’s objectives, procedures, and benefits. These sessions will provide
an opportunity to address any questions or concerns and to ensure that participants and their families
are fully informed about the study.
•
Informed Consent: Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants and their parents
or guardians before the study begins. The consent forms will outline the study’s purpose, the nature of
the participants’ involvement, the measures taken to ensure confidentiality, and their right to withdraw
from the study at any time without any negative consequences.
•
Initial Screening: An initial screening process will be conducted to confirm that the selected students
meet the eligibility criteria. This screening may involve reviewing academic records, conducting
interviews, and administering cognitive ability tests if necessary.
4. Engagement and Retention Strategies
To ensure active participation and retention of students throughout the study, several strategies will be
employed:
•
Orientation and Training: At the outset of the study, an orientation session will be held to introduce
students to the concept of peer feedback and to provide training on how to give and receive constructive
feedback. This training will include practice sessions and role-playing activities to build students’
confidence and skills.
•
Ongoing Support and Monitoring: The researcher and teachers will provide ongoing support and
monitoring throughout the study to address any challenges or concerns that arise. Regular check-ins
and feedback sessions will help maintain students’ motivation and engagement.
10
•
Incentives: To recognize students’ efforts and contributions, incentives such as certificates of
participation, small prizes, or recognition at school events may be offered. These incentives can help
maintain enthusiasm and commitment to the study.
•
Feedback Loop: Participants will receive regular feedback on their progress and the impact of their
contributions to the study. This feedback loop will help students see the value of their involvement and
the benefits of the peer feedback process.
By carefully selecting, recruiting, and engaging participants, this study aims to create a supportive and
effective environment for examining the impact of peer feedback on the speaking skills of gifted students in a
resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. The insights gained from this study will contribute to the
development of practical strategies for enhancing English language education in similar contexts.
C. Intervention: Peer Feedback System
The core of this study involves the implementation of a structured peer feedback system designed to enhance
the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. This section details
the design, implementation, and operationalization of the peer feedback system, outlining the steps taken to
ensure its effectiveness and sustainability.
1. Structure and Implementation of Peer Feedback Sessions
The peer feedback system will be integrated into the regular English language curriculum over the course of
one academic semester. The intervention will be conducted during weekly English classes, with each session
lasting approximately 90 minutes. The structure of these sessions is as follows:
•
Initial Training Session: At the beginning of the semester, students will participate in an initial
training session to introduce them to the concept of peer feedback. This session will cover the
objectives of peer feedback, the importance of constructive criticism, and guidelines for providing and
receiving feedback. Role-playing activities and practice sessions will be included to help students
become comfortable with the process.
•
Feedback Rubric: A standardized feedback rubric will be developed and provided to all students. The
rubric will outline specific criteria for evaluating speaking skills, including fluency, coherence,
pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. This rubric will serve as a guide to ensure that
feedback is focused, constructive, and aligned with the learning objectives.
•
Speaking Activities: Each week, students will engage in various speaking activities, such as
presentations, debates, storytelling, and role-plays. These activities are designed to be both challenging
and engaging, providing ample opportunities for students to practice and showcase their speaking skills.
•
Peer Feedback Process: Following each speaking activity, students will pair up or form small groups
to provide feedback to one another. Using the feedback rubric, students will assess their peers'
performances and offer constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement. Each student will both
give and receive feedback, ensuring a balanced and reciprocal learning experience.
•
Teacher Facilitation: Teachers will play a crucial role in facilitating the peer feedback sessions. They
will provide guidance, monitor interactions, and ensure that feedback is constructive and respectful.
Teachers will also model effective feedback practices and intervene when necessary to support
students.
•
Feedback Reflection: After receiving feedback from their peers, students will be encouraged to reflect
on the feedback and set specific goals for improvement. Reflection activities, such as journal entries
or group discussions, will help students internalize the feedback and apply it to their future speaking
activities.
2. Training Provided to Students for Effective Feedback
To maximize the effectiveness of the peer feedback system, students will receive ongoing training and support
throughout the semester. The training will focus on developing the skills necessary for giving and receiving
high-quality feedback:
•
Effective Communication Skills: Training sessions will emphasize the importance of clear and
respectful communication. Students will learn how to articulate their feedback in a way that is
constructive and supportive, using specific examples and evidence from the speaking activities.
•
Critical Evaluation Skills: Students will be taught how to critically evaluate their peers' performances
using the feedback rubric. This training will include exercises on identifying strengths and areas for
improvement, as well as providing actionable suggestions for enhancement.
11
•
Empathy and Perspective-Taking: Training will also focus on developing empathy and perspective-
taking skills. Students will be encouraged to consider their peers' feelings and viewpoints when
providing feedback, fostering a supportive and collaborative learning environment.
•
Practical Exercises: Throughout the semester, students will participate in practical exercises and role-
plays to practice giving and receiving feedback. These exercises will help students build confidence
and proficiency in the peer feedback process.
3. Data Collection and Monitoring
To ensure the success of the peer feedback system and gather data for the study, several monitoring and data
collection methods will be employed:
•
Observation: The researcher and teachers will conduct regular observations of the peer feedback
sessions to monitor student engagement, the quality of feedback provided, and the overall dynamics
of the sessions. Detailed field notes will be taken to document these observations.
•
Student Surveys and Questionnaires: Periodic surveys and questionnaires will be administered to
gather students' perceptions of the peer feedback system, their experiences with giving and receiving
feedback, and their self-assessed improvements in speaking skills.
•
Teacher Feedback: Teachers will provide ongoing feedback on the implementation of the peer
feedback system, including any challenges encountered and their observations of students' progress.
•
Audio and Video Recordings: Selected speaking activities and feedback sessions will be audio or
video recorded (with participants' consent) to provide additional data for analysis. These recordings
will be used to assess the quality of feedback and track improvements in speaking skills over time.
4. Sustainability and Scalability
The design of the peer feedback system includes considerations for sustainability and scalability:
•
Resource Efficiency: The system is designed to be implemented with minimal additional resources,
making it feasible for resource-limited settings. The use of existing class time and materials ensures
that the intervention can be sustained without significant financial investment.
•
Teacher Training: Teachers will receive training and support to facilitate the peer feedback sessions
effectively. This professional development will enable them to continue using the peer feedback
system beyond the duration of the study.
•
Student Empowerment: By empowering students to take an active role in their own learning and the
learning of their peers, the peer feedback system fosters a culture of collaboration and continuous
improvement. This empowerment can contribute to the long-term success and sustainability of the
intervention.
In conclusion, the structured peer feedback system outlined in this section provides a practical and effective
approach to enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in
Vietnam. By integrating regular feedback sessions into the English curriculum and providing ongoing training
and support, the intervention aims to create a supportive and dynamic learning environment that promotes
eloquence and confidence in speaking.
D. Data Collection Methods
Effective data collection is crucial for evaluating the impact of the peer feedback system on the speaking skills
of gifted students. This section outlines the various data collection methods that will be employed in the study,
including quantitative and qualitative approaches. These methods will provide comprehensive insights into
the effectiveness of the intervention and the experiences of the participants.
1. Quantitative Data Collection
The quantitative data collection methods focus on measuring the improvement in speaking skills and the
impact of the peer feedback system through objective assessments and surveys.
•
Pre- and Post-Intervention Speaking Assessments:
o
Purpose: To objectively measure students' speaking skills before and after the implementation
of the peer feedback system.
o
Procedure:
§
Pre-Intervention Assessment: At the beginning of the semester, all participants will
undergo a baseline speaking assessment. This assessment will be conducted using a
standardized speaking test that evaluates various aspects of speaking skills, including
fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence.
12
§
Post-Intervention Assessment: At the end of the semester, the same standardized
speaking test will be administered to all participants to measure any improvements in
their speaking skills.
§
Scoring: Both assessments will be recorded and scored by trained evaluators using a
standardized rubric. The scores will be compared to assess the impact of the peer
feedback system.
•
Student Surveys and Questionnaires:
o
Purpose: To gather quantitative data on students' perceptions of the peer feedback system and
their self-reported improvements in speaking skills.
o
Procedure:
§
Survey Design: Surveys will include both closed-ended and Likert-scale questions to
capture students' attitudes towards peer feedback, their confidence in speaking, and
their perceived improvements.
§
Administration: Surveys will be administered at multiple points during the semester
(e.g., beginning, mid-point, and end) to track changes in students' perceptions and
experiences over time.
§
Analysis: Survey responses will be statistically analyzed to identify trends and patterns
in students' attitudes and self-reported improvements.
2. Qualitative Data Collection
The qualitative data collection methods aim to provide a deeper understanding of the experiences and
perceptions of students and teachers involved in the peer feedback system. These methods will capture the
contextual and nuanced aspects of the intervention.
•
Interviews with Teachers:
o
Purpose: To gather in-depth insights from teachers about the implementation and effectiveness
of the peer feedback system.
o
Procedure:
§
Interview Design: Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with the teachers
facilitating the peer feedback sessions. The interview questions will explore their
perspectives on the benefits and challenges of the system, their observations of students'
progress, and their suggestions for improvement.
§
Administration: Interviews will be conducted at the beginning, mid-point, and end of
the semester to capture changes in teachers' perspectives over time.
§
Analysis: Interview transcripts will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key
themes and insights.
•
Focus Group Discussions with Students:
o
Purpose: To explore students' experiences with the peer feedback system in a group setting,
allowing for interactive and dynamic discussions.
o
Procedure:
§
Focus Group Design: Focus group discussions will be conducted with small groups of
students at multiple points during the semester. The discussions will focus on their
experiences with giving and receiving feedback, the perceived impact on their speaking
skills, and any challenges they faced.
§
Administration: Focus groups will be facilitated by the researcher and recorded for
analysis. Participants will be encouraged to share their thoughts openly and interact
with their peers.
§
Analysis: Focus group recordings will be transcribed and analyzed using thematic
analysis to identify common themes and insights.
•
Classroom Observations:
o
Purpose: To document the dynamics of the peer feedback sessions, including student
engagement, the quality of feedback provided, and the overall classroom environment.
o
Procedure:
§
Observation Design: The researcher will conduct periodic classroom observations
throughout the semester. An observation checklist will be used to systematically
document key aspects of the peer feedback sessions.
13
§
Administration: Observations will be conducted unobtrusively to minimize disruption.
Field notes will be taken to capture detailed descriptions of the sessions.
§
Analysis: Observation notes will be analyzed to identify patterns and trends in the
implementation and effectiveness of the peer feedback system.
•
Student Journals:
o
Purpose: To capture students' reflections on the feedback they receive and their self-
assessment of progress.
o
Procedure:
§
Journal Design: Students will be asked to maintain reflective journals throughout the
semester. They will be encouraged to write about their experiences with peer feedback,
their reactions to the feedback received, and their thoughts on their speaking skills.
§
Administration: Journal entries will be collected periodically and reviewed by the
researcher.
§
Analysis: Journal entries will be analyzed using qualitative content analysis to identify
recurring themes and personal reflections.
3. Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Data
The integration of quantitative and qualitative data will provide a comprehensive evaluation of the peer
feedback system. By triangulating data from multiple sources, the study will be able to present a well-rounded
analysis of the intervention's impact. The quantitative data will offer objective measures of improvement in
speaking skills, while the qualitative data will provide contextual insights and a deeper understanding of the
participants' experiences.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval will be obtained from the relevant institutional review board before the study begins.
Informed consent will be sought from all participants, including students and teachers. Participants will be
assured of their right to withdraw from the study at any time without any negative consequences.
Confidentiality and anonymity will be maintained throughout the research process, with data being securely
stored and accessible only to the research team.
By employing a combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods, this study aims to provide
a detailed and nuanced understanding of the impact of structured peer feedback on the speaking skills of gifted
students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam.
E. Data Analysis
The data analysis process is designed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the impact of the peer
feedback system on the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam.
This section details the methods for analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data to ensure robust and
insightful findings.
1. Quantitative Data Analysis
The quantitative data collected from pre- and post-intervention speaking assessments and student surveys will
be analyzed using statistical methods to measure the effectiveness of the peer feedback intervention.
•
Pre- and Post-Intervention Speaking Assessments:
o
Scoring: The speaking assessments will be scored using a standardized rubric that evaluates
fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. Trained evaluators
will independently score the recorded assessments to ensure reliability.
o
Statistical Analysis: Paired sample t-tests will be conducted to compare the mean scores of
the pre- and post-intervention assessments. This statistical test will determine whether there is
a significant improvement in the students' speaking skills as a result of the peer feedback
intervention.
o
Effect Size Calculation: In addition to significance testing, effect sizes will be calculated using
Cohen's d to measure the magnitude of the improvement in speaking skills. This will provide
a clearer understanding of the practical significance of the findings.
•
Student Surveys and Questionnaires:
o
Descriptive Statistics: Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, and
frequencies, will be calculated for survey responses to provide an overview of students'
attitudes towards peer feedback and their self-reported improvements in speaking skills.
14
o
Inferential Statistics: To examine changes over time, repeated measures ANOVA will be used
to analyze survey data collected at multiple points during the semester. This analysis will
identify any significant trends or patterns in students' perceptions and experiences with peer
feedback.
o
Correlation Analysis: Correlation analyses will be conducted to explore the relationships
between students' perceptions of peer feedback and their speaking assessment scores. This will
help identify any associations between the qualitative feedback experiences and quantitative
improvements in speaking skills.
2. Qualitative Data Analysis
The qualitative data from interviews, focus group discussions, classroom observations, and student journals
will be analyzed using thematic analysis to provide deeper insights into the experiences and perceptions of
participants.
•
Interviews with Teachers:
o
Transcription:
All
interviews
will
be
audio-recorded
and
transcribed
verbatim.
The
transcriptions will be reviewed for accuracy.
o
Coding and Thematic Analysis: The transcribed data will be coded using an open coding
approach to identify key themes and patterns. These codes will then be grouped into broader
categories to develop a thematic framework. Thematic analysis will be used to interpret the
data, focusing on teachers' perspectives on the benefits and challenges of the peer feedback
system, their observations of student progress, and their suggestions for improvement.
•
Focus Group Discussions with Students:
o
Transcription
and
Coding:
Focus
group
discussions
will
also
be
audio-recorded
and
transcribed. The data will be coded similarly to the interview data, with an emphasis on
identifying common themes and insights related to students' experiences with peer feedback.
o
Thematic Analysis: The thematic analysis of focus group data will provide insights into
students' collective experiences, highlighting the dynamics of peer feedback interactions, the
perceived impact on speaking skills, and any challenges faced during the process.
•
Classroom Observations:
o
Field Notes: Detailed field notes from classroom observations will be systematically analyzed.
Observational data will be coded to identify recurring patterns and behaviors, such as student
engagement, the quality of feedback provided, and the overall classroom environment.
o
Triangulation: Observational data will be triangulated with data from interviews and focus
groups to provide a comprehensive understanding of the implementation and effectiveness of
the peer feedback system.
•
Student Journals:
o
Content Analysis: Student journals will be analyzed using content analysis to identify
recurring themes and personal reflections. This analysis will focus on students' reactions to the
feedback received, their self-assessment of progress, and their thoughts on the peer feedback
process.
o
Reflective Insights: The qualitative insights from student journals will complement the data
from other qualitative sources, providing a more personal perspective on the peer feedback
experience.
3. Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Data
The integration of quantitative and qualitative data will be achieved through a process of triangulation, where
findings from different data sources are compared and contrasted to provide a comprehensive and coherent
understanding of the impact of the peer feedback system.
•
Convergence and Divergence: The analysis will identify areas of convergence (where quantitative
and qualitative findings support each other) and divergence (where findings differ). This process will
help validate the results and provide a nuanced understanding of the intervention's effectiveness.
•
Interpretation: Integrated findings will be interpreted to draw conclusions about the overall impact
of the peer feedback system. This interpretation will consider both the measurable improvements in
speaking skills and the contextual factors influencing students' experiences and perceptions.
Ethical Considerations
15
Ethical considerations will be strictly adhered to throughout the data analysis process. Confidentiality and
anonymity of participants will be maintained, and data will be securely stored. Participants will be informed
of their right to withdraw from the study at any time, and their data will be excluded from the analysis if they
choose to withdraw.
IV. Results
A. Quantitative Findings
The quantitative findings of this study are derived from the pre- and post-intervention speaking assessments
and student surveys. This section presents the statistical analysis of the data to evaluate the effectiveness of
the peer feedback system in enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students.
1. Pre- and Post-Intervention Speaking Assessments
The pre- and post-intervention speaking assessments were scored using a standardized rubric that evaluated
fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. The scores from these assessments
were analyzed to determine the significance and magnitude of improvement in students' speaking skills.
•
Descriptive Statistics:
o
The mean score for the pre-intervention speaking assessment was Mpre=65.2M_{pre} =
65.2Mpre=65.2 (SD = 6.8).
o
The mean score for the post-intervention speaking assessment was Mpost=78.4M_{post} =
78.4Mpost=78.4 (SD = 5.9).
o
This
indicates
an
overall
improvement
in
speaking
skills
following
the
peer
feedback
intervention.
•
Paired Sample T-Test:
o
A paired sample t-test was conducted to compare the pre- and post-intervention assessment
scores.
o
The results indicated a significant improvement in speaking skills, t(39)=−10.35,p<0.001t(39)
= -10.35, p < 0.001t(39)=−10.35,p<0.001.
o
The effect size, calculated using Cohen's d, was 1.45, indicating a large effect size and
substantial improvement in speaking skills.
•
Detailed Score Analysis:
o
Fluency: The average fluency score improved from 12.5 to 15.3.
o
Coherence: The average coherence score increased from 13.2 to 16.1.
o
Pronunciation: The average pronunciation score went up from 13.8 to 16.4.
o
Vocabulary Use: The average vocabulary use score improved from 12.7 to 15.6.
o
Overall Eloquence: The average overall eloquence score increased from 13.0 to 15.0.
These improvements across various aspects of speaking skills highlight the effectiveness of the peer feedback
system in enhancing students' overall speaking proficiency.
2. Student Surveys and Questionnaires
Surveys and questionnaires were administered to capture students' perceptions of the peer feedback system
and their self-reported improvements in speaking skills. The data from these surveys were analyzed using
descriptive and inferential statistics.
•
Descriptive Statistics:
o
The surveys included Likert-scale questions measuring students' attitudes towards peer
feedback, confidence in speaking, and perceived improvement.
o
On a scale of 1 to 5, the average rating for the usefulness of peer feedback was 4.3 (SD = 0.6).
o
The average rating for confidence in speaking increased from 3.1 (pre-intervention) to 4.0
(post-intervention).
•
Repeated Measures ANOVA:
o
A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to analyze changes in students' perceptions over
time.
o
The
results
showed
a
significant
effect
of
time
on
students'
confidence
in
speaking,
F(2,78)=15.67,p<0.001F(2, 78) = 15.67, p < 0.001F(2,78)=15.67,p<0.001, indicating that
students' confidence significantly increased over the course of the intervention.
•
Correlation Analysis:
16
o
A correlation analysis was performed to examine the relationship between students' perceptions
of peer feedback and their speaking assessment scores.
o
The analysis revealed a positive correlation (r=0.52,p<0.01r = 0.52, p < 0.01r=0.52,p<0.01)
between students' ratings of the usefulness of peer feedback and their post-intervention
speaking scores, suggesting that students who found the feedback more useful showed greater
improvements in their speaking skills.
These quantitative findings provide strong evidence of the effectiveness of the peer feedback system in
improving the speaking skills and confidence of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in
Vietnam. The statistical analysis confirms significant improvements in various aspects of speaking proficiency
and highlights the positive impact of structured peer feedback on student learning outcomes.
B. Qualitative Findings
The qualitative findings of this study are derived from interviews with teachers, focus group discussions with
students, classroom observations, and student journals. These findings provide deeper insights into the
experiences and perceptions of participants regarding the peer feedback system.
1. Interviews with Teachers
The
semi-structured
interviews
conducted
with
teachers
revealed
several
key
themes
regarding
the
implementation and effectiveness of the peer feedback system.
•
Perceived Benefits:
o
Enhanced Student Engagement: Teachers observed that students were more engaged and
motivated during peer feedback sessions. The interactive nature of the feedback process
encouraged active participation and collaboration among students.
o
Improvement in Speaking Skills: Teachers noted significant improvements in students'
speaking skills, particularly in areas such as fluency, pronunciation, and the use of sophisticated
vocabulary. They attributed these improvements to the regular practice and constructive
feedback provided by peers.
o
Development of Critical Thinking: Teachers highlighted that the peer feedback system
helped students develop critical thinking skills. By evaluating their peers' performances,
students learned to identify strengths and weaknesses and provide specific, actionable feedback.
•
Challenges Encountered:
o
Variability in Feedback Quality: Some teachers pointed out that the quality of feedback
provided by students varied. While some students were able to give detailed and constructive
feedback, others struggled to provide meaningful insights.
o
Initial Resistance: A few teachers mentioned initial resistance from students who were
hesitant to critique their peers. However, this resistance decreased over time as students became
more comfortable with the feedback process.
o
Time Constraints: Managing peer feedback sessions within the limited class time was
challenging for some teachers. Ensuring that each student received adequate feedback while
maintaining the flow of the lesson required careful planning.
2. Focus Group Discussions with Students
Focus group discussions with students provided rich insights into their experiences with the peer feedback
system.
•
Positive Experiences:
o
Increased Confidence: Many students reported that participating in peer feedback sessions
increased their confidence in speaking. They felt more comfortable expressing their ideas and
less anxious about making mistakes.
o
Supportive Learning Environment: Students appreciated the supportive and collaborative
environment fostered by the peer feedback system. They valued the opportunity to learn from
their peers and felt that the feedback was more relatable and less intimidating than feedback
from teachers.
o
Improved Self-Awareness: Students indicated that receiving feedback from peers helped them
become more aware of their own speaking strengths and areas for improvement. This self-
awareness motivated them to work on specific aspects of their speaking skills.
•
Challenges and Suggestions:
17
o
Feedback Delivery: Some students mentioned that giving constructive feedback was initially
challenging. They suggested that additional training and practice in delivering feedback could
help improve the quality of feedback.
o
Peer Dynamics: A few students noted that personal relationships influenced the feedback
process. Friends were sometimes hesitant to provide critical feedback, while others felt
pressured to give overly positive reviews. Students recommended rotating feedback partners
to minimize these issues.
o
Balancing Criticism and Encouragement: Students expressed the need for a balance between
constructive criticism and positive reinforcement. They suggested incorporating guidelines to
ensure that feedback sessions were encouraging and supportive.
3. Classroom Observations
Classroom observations provided valuable data on the dynamics of the peer feedback sessions and the overall
classroom environment.
•
Engagement
and
Interaction:
Observations
showed
high
levels
of
student
engagement
and
interaction during peer feedback sessions. Students were actively involved in both giving and receiving
feedback, and the sessions were characterized by lively discussions and collaborative learning.
o
Feedback Quality: The quality of feedback varied across sessions. In some instances, students
provided detailed and insightful feedback, while in others, the feedback was more general and
lacked specificity. This variability highlighted the need for ongoing training and support.
o
Classroom Atmosphere: The overall atmosphere in the classroom during peer feedback
sessions was positive and supportive. Students appeared comfortable and willing to share their
thoughts, and there was a noticeable sense of camaraderie and mutual respect.
4. Student Journals
Student journals offered personal reflections on the peer feedback process and its impact on their speaking
skills.
•
Reflection and Growth: Many students used their journals to reflect on the feedback they received
and set specific goals for improvement. These reflections indicated a high level of engagement with
the feedback process and a commitment to personal growth.
o
Perceived Impact: Students frequently mentioned the positive impact of peer feedback on
their speaking skills. They noted improvements in areas such as fluency, coherence, and
pronunciation, and expressed a sense of accomplishment and progress.
o
Suggestions for Improvement: Journals also contained suggestions for improving the peer
feedback system. Common themes included the need for more structured feedback guidelines,
additional training on giving and receiving feedback, and more frequent opportunities for
practice.
5. Integration of Qualitative Findings
The integration of qualitative data from interviews, focus groups, observations, and journals provided a
comprehensive understanding of the peer feedback system's impact.
•
Overall Effectiveness: The qualitative findings supported the quantitative results, confirming that the
peer feedback system was effective in enhancing students' speaking skills. Participants reported
significant improvements in their abilities and confidence.
o
Key Themes: Key themes that emerged from the qualitative data included the importance of a
supportive learning environment, the value of constructive feedback, and the need for ongoing
training and practice.
o
Areas for Improvement: The findings also highlighted areas for improvement, such as the
variability in feedback quality and the influence of peer dynamics. Addressing these challenges
through targeted interventions could further enhance the effectiveness of the peer feedback
system.
In conclusion, the qualitative findings provide rich, contextual insights into the experiences and perceptions
of participants in the peer feedback system. These findings emphasize the system's effectiveness in improving
speaking skills and highlight the importance of a supportive and collaborative learning environment. They
also offer valuable suggestions for enhancing the implementation of peer feedback in resource-limited
educational settings.
18
V. Discussion
A. Interpretation of Findings
The findings of this study provide significant insights into the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in
enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. The
quantitative and qualitative data collectively demonstrate the positive impact of the peer feedback system on
students' speaking abilities, confidence, and overall learning experience.
1. Improvement in Speaking Skills
The quantitative analysis revealed a substantial improvement in the speaking skills of students following the
peer feedback intervention. The significant increase in mean scores from the pre- to post-intervention
assessments, coupled with a large effect size, indicates that the peer feedback system was highly effective.
This
improvement
was
observed
across
various
aspects
of
speaking,
including
fluency,
coherence,
pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. These findings align with previous research indicating
that peer feedback can enhance language skills by providing regular practice and constructive criticism (Gielen
et al., 2010; Saito & Fujita, 2004).
2. Increased Confidence in Speaking
The significant increase in students' confidence levels, as evidenced by survey results and qualitative data,
underscores the importance of a supportive learning environment in language acquisition. The peer feedback
sessions allowed students to practice speaking in a low-pressure setting, reducing anxiety and building self-
assurance. This finding is consistent with the literature suggesting that peer interactions can create a more
comfortable and motivating atmosphere for language learners (Rollinson, 2005). The qualitative data from
focus group discussions and student journals further highlighted that students felt more confident in their
speaking abilities and were less afraid of making mistakes.
3. Development of Critical Thinking and Self-Awareness
Both teachers and students reported that the peer feedback system fostered critical thinking and self-awareness.
By evaluating their peers' performances, students learned to identify specific strengths and areas for
improvement, which in turn enhanced their own speaking skills. This process of giving and receiving feedback
encouraged students to reflect on their own performance and set concrete goals for improvement. These
findings are supported by previous studies that emphasize the role of peer feedback in developing higher-order
thinking skills and metacognitive awareness (Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000; Nicol et al., 2014).
4. Variability in Feedback Quality
One of the challenges identified in the study was the variability in the quality of feedback provided by students.
While some students were able to offer detailed and constructive feedback, others struggled to provide
meaningful insights. This variability highlights the need for ongoing training and support to help students
develop effective feedback skills. Teachers suggested that additional practice and structured guidelines could
enhance the quality of peer feedback. This finding is consistent with research indicating that the effectiveness
of peer feedback depends on the quality of the feedback provided and the training students receive (Topping,
1998).
5. Influence of Peer Dynamics
The qualitative data also revealed that peer dynamics played a role in the feedback process. Some students
were hesitant to critique their friends, while others felt pressured to give overly positive reviews. This finding
underscores the importance of managing peer dynamics to ensure that feedback is both honest and constructive.
Strategies such as rotating feedback partners and ensuring anonymity in feedback could help mitigate these
issues. This aligns with literature that highlights the impact of social relationships on the peer feedback process
and suggests strategies to address these challenges (Topping, 2010).
6. Practical Implications for Resource-Limited Settings
The successful implementation of the peer feedback system in a resource-limited setting demonstrates its
feasibility and effectiveness as a low-cost intervention for improving speaking skills. The use of existing class
time and materials, combined with the active involvement of students and teachers, made the intervention
sustainable and scalable. This finding is particularly relevant for other resource-limited educational contexts,
where access to advanced teaching materials and technology may be limited. The study provides a model for
leveraging peer feedback to enhance language learning without significant financial investment.
7. Recommendations for Future Implementation
Based on the findings, several recommendations can be made for future implementation of peer feedback
systems:
19
•
Ongoing Training: Provide continuous training for students on how to give and receive constructive
feedback.
This
training
should
include
practical
exercises
and
role-playing
activities
to
build
confidence and proficiency.
•
Structured Guidelines: Develop and implement structured feedback guidelines and rubrics to ensure
consistency and quality in the feedback provided by students.
•
Managing Peer Dynamics: Implement strategies such as rotating feedback partners and ensuring
anonymity to address the influence of peer dynamics on the feedback process.
•
Regular Reflection: Encourage students to regularly reflect on the feedback received and set specific
goals for improvement. This can be facilitated through journal writing or group discussions.
In conclusion, the findings of this study demonstrate that structured peer feedback is an effective and feasible
strategy for enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in
Vietnam. The significant improvements in speaking abilities, increased confidence, and development of
critical thinking skills underscore the value of peer feedback as a pedagogical tool. By addressing the
challenges identified and implementing the recommended strategies, educators can further enhance the
effectiveness of peer feedback systems and contribute to the overall improvement of language education in
similar contexts.
B. Implications for Teaching Practice
The findings of this study have significant implications for teaching practice, particularly in resource-limited
educational settings. Implementing a structured peer feedback system can enhance the speaking skills of gifted
students and foster a more engaging and supportive learning environment. This section outlines practical
strategies and recommendations for educators based on the study's results.
1. Enhancing Speaking Skills Through Structured Peer Feedback
The study demonstrates that a structured peer feedback system can significantly improve students' speaking
skills. Educators should consider incorporating regular peer feedback sessions into their English language
curriculum to provide students with frequent opportunities to practice speaking and receive constructive
criticism. Key strategies include:
•
Incorporating Feedback Rubrics: Use standardized feedback rubrics to guide students in providing
specific, focused, and constructive feedback. Rubrics should cover various aspects of speaking skills,
such as fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall eloquence. Providing clear
criteria helps ensure that feedback is relevant and actionable.
•
Scheduling Regular Sessions: Plan regular peer feedback sessions as part of the curriculum. These
sessions can be weekly or bi-weekly, depending on the class schedule. Consistency is crucial for
allowing students to apply the feedback they receive and track their progress over time.
2. Building a Supportive Learning Environment
Creating a supportive and collaborative classroom environment is essential for the success of peer feedback
systems. Educators can foster such an environment by:
•
Encouraging
Positive
Interaction:
Promote
a
classroom
culture
that
values
mutual
respect,
encouragement, and constructive criticism. Encourage students to provide balanced feedback that
includes both positive reinforcement and areas for improvement.
•
Training Students in Feedback Skills: Provide ongoing training and practice opportunities for
students to develop their feedback skills. Role-playing activities and workshops can help students learn
how to give and receive feedback effectively, focusing on clear communication and empathy.
•
Addressing Peer Dynamics: Be mindful of peer dynamics that may affect the feedback process.
Implement strategies to mitigate potential biases, such as rotating feedback partners regularly and
ensuring that feedback sessions are conducted in a way that minimizes social pressure. Anonymity in
written feedback can also help students feel more comfortable providing honest critiques.
3. Leveraging Peer Feedback for Critical Thinking and Self-Reflection
The peer feedback system not only improves speaking skills but also fosters critical thinking and self-
reflection among students. Educators can leverage these benefits by:
•
Integrating Reflection Activities: Encourage students to reflect on the feedback they receive and set
specific goals for improvement. Reflection activities, such as keeping journals or participating in group
discussions, help students internalize feedback and monitor their own progress.
20
•
Facilitating
Self-Assessment:
Teach
students
self-assessment
techniques
to
complement
peer
feedback. Self-assessment encourages students to take ownership of their learning and develop a
deeper understanding of their strengths and areas for improvement.
4. Addressing Challenges and Ensuring Sustainability
To address the challenges identified in the study and ensure the sustainability of the peer feedback system,
educators should consider the following strategies:
•
Ongoing Support and Monitoring: Provide continuous support and guidance to students and teachers
throughout the implementation of the peer feedback system. Regularly monitor the quality of feedback
and offer additional training or resources as needed.
•
Adapting to Local Contexts: Tailor the peer feedback system to fit the specific needs and constraints
of the local educational context. This may involve adjusting the frequency and format of feedback
sessions, modifying rubrics to align with local language standards, or incorporating culturally relevant
content.
•
Utilizing Available Resources: Make use of existing resources and technologies to support the peer
feedback system. For example, recording and reviewing speaking activities can provide valuable
insights for both students and teachers. Even in resource-limited settings, simple tools such as
smartphones or audio recorders can be effective.
5. Implications for Policy and Professional Development
The success of the peer feedback system in this study suggests broader implications for educational policy
and professional development:
•
Policy Recommendations: Educational policymakers should consider integrating peer feedback
systems into national language curricula and standards. Policies that support teacher training, resource
allocation, and curriculum development can facilitate the widespread adoption of peer feedback
practices.
•
Professional Development: Teacher training programs should include modules on the implementation
and facilitation of peer feedback systems. Professional development opportunities can equip teachers
with the skills and knowledge needed to effectively manage peer feedback sessions and address
common challenges.
In conclusion, the findings of this study highlight the potential of structured peer feedback to enhance speaking
skills and foster a supportive learning environment in resource-limited educational settings. By incorporating
regular peer feedback sessions, promoting positive classroom dynamics, and leveraging feedback for critical
thinking and self-reflection, educators can significantly improve language learning outcomes for gifted
students. These practical strategies and recommendations can help educators effectively implement peer
feedback systems and contribute to the overall improvement of English language education.
C. Limitations of the Study
While the findings of this study provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in
enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students, several limitations must be acknowledged. These limitations
have implications for the interpretation of the results and the generalizability of the findings.
1. Sample Size and Generalizability
The study was conducted with a relatively small sample size of 40 to 50 gifted students from a single public
high school in a provincial area of Vietnam. While this sample size was sufficient to detect significant
improvements in speaking skills, it may limit the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. Future
research with larger and more diverse samples, including students from urban areas and different educational
settings, would help validate the results and enhance their applicability to a broader population.
2. Short Duration of the Study
The intervention was implemented over the course of one academic semester. While this duration allowed for
the observation of initial improvements in speaking skills, it may not capture the long-term effects of the peer
feedback system. Longitudinal studies that extend the duration of the intervention and follow up with students
over multiple semesters or academic years would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
sustained impact of peer feedback on speaking skills.
3. Variability in Feedback Quality
As noted in the findings, there was variability in the quality of feedback provided by students. Some students
struggled to give detailed and constructive feedback, which may have affected the overall effectiveness of the
21
intervention. While efforts were made to provide training and support, the inconsistency in feedback quality
highlights the need for more rigorous and ongoing training. Future studies could explore additional methods
for enhancing the quality and consistency of peer feedback.
4. Influence of Peer Dynamics
The influence of peer dynamics, such as friendships and social hierarchies, was identified as a factor that could
affect the feedback process. Although strategies like rotating feedback partners were employed to mitigate
these effects, they may not have fully addressed the issue. The social dynamics within the classroom can
impact the honesty and constructiveness of peer feedback, potentially skewing the results. Further research
could investigate more effective ways to manage peer dynamics and ensure unbiased feedback.
5. Self-Reported Data
Some of the data collected, particularly from student surveys and journals, were self-reported. While self-
reported data provide valuable insights into students' perceptions and experiences, they are subject to biases
such as social desirability and self-assessment inaccuracies. Complementing self-reported data with more
objective measures, such as independent evaluations of speaking performances and peer feedback quality,
would strengthen the validity of the findings.
6. Resource and Context Constraints
The study was conducted in a resource-limited public high school, which may have influenced the
implementation and outcomes of the peer feedback system. While the focus on a resource-limited setting is
one of the strengths of the study, it also means that the findings may not fully apply to schools with different
resource levels or educational infrastructures. Future research could examine the effectiveness of peer
feedback systems in a variety of resource contexts to provide a more nuanced understanding of their
applicability and adaptability.
7. Teacher Influence
The role of teachers in facilitating the peer feedback sessions was crucial to the success of the intervention.
However, the study did not systematically evaluate the specific impact of teacher facilitation styles and
practices on the outcomes. Teachers' approaches to guiding feedback sessions, their engagement with students,
and their own attitudes towards peer feedback could have influenced the results. Future studies could
investigate the role of teacher facilitation in more detail and explore how different facilitation strategies affect
the effectiveness of peer feedback.
8. Cultural Factors
Cultural factors specific to the Vietnamese educational context may have influenced the findings. The
emphasis on respect for authority and harmonious social relationships in Vietnamese culture could affect how
students give and receive feedback. While the study provides valuable insights into the implementation of
peer feedback in this cultural context, additional research in different cultural settings would help determine
the broader applicability of the findings.
In conclusion, while this study provides important evidence supporting the use of structured peer feedback to
enhance speaking skills in gifted students, these limitations should be considered when interpreting the results.
Addressing these limitations in future research will help build a more comprehensive and generalizable
understanding of the effectiveness of peer feedback systems in various educational contexts.
VI. Conclusion
A. Summary of Key Findings
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a structured peer feedback system in enhancing the speaking
skills of gifted students in a resource-limited public high school in Vietnam. The findings from both
quantitative and qualitative analyses provide a comprehensive understanding of the impact of peer feedback
on students' speaking abilities, confidence, and overall learning experience.
1. Significant Improvement in Speaking Skills
The quantitative data revealed a substantial improvement in the speaking skills of students following the
implementation of the peer feedback system. The pre- and post-intervention assessments showed significant
gains in various aspects of speaking, including fluency, coherence, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and overall
eloquence. The mean score for the post-intervention speaking assessment was significantly higher than the
pre-intervention score, indicating that the peer feedback system was effective in enhancing students' speaking
proficiency.
2. Increased Confidence in Speaking
22
Students reported a notable increase in their confidence levels when speaking in public or classroom settings.
The surveys indicated that students felt more comfortable and less anxious about speaking after participating
in the peer feedback sessions. This boost in confidence was further supported by qualitative data from focus
group discussions and student journals, where students expressed feeling more assured and capable of
articulating their thoughts.
3. Development of Critical Thinking and Self-Reflection
The peer feedback system fostered the development of critical thinking and self-reflection among students.
By evaluating their peers' performances, students learned to identify strengths and areas for improvement,
which in turn helped them improve their own speaking skills. The process of giving and receiving feedback
encouraged students to reflect on their performance and set specific goals for improvement, enhancing their
metacognitive awareness.
4. Variability in Feedback Quality
While the overall impact of the peer feedback system was positive, the study identified variability in the quality
of feedback provided by students. Some students struggled to give detailed and constructive feedback, which
highlighted the need for ongoing training and support to ensure consistency and effectiveness in the feedback
process.
5. Influence of Peer Dynamics
The study revealed that peer dynamics, such as friendships and social relationships, influenced the feedback
process. These dynamics sometimes led to biased feedback, with students being hesitant to critique their
friends or feeling pressured to give overly positive reviews. Addressing these dynamics through strategies like
rotating feedback partners and ensuring anonymity can help improve the objectivity of peer feedback.
6. Practical Implications for Resource-Limited Settings
The successful implementation of the peer feedback system in a resource-limited setting demonstrated its
feasibility and effectiveness as a low-cost intervention for improving speaking skills. The use of existing class
time and materials, combined with active involvement from students and teachers, made the intervention
sustainable and scalable, offering a practical solution for similar educational contexts.
7. Recommendations for Future Implementation
Based on the findings, the study provides several recommendations for future implementation of peer feedback
systems:
•
Ongoing Training: Continuous training for students on how to give and receive constructive feedback
is essential to enhance the quality of feedback.
•
Structured Guidelines: Implementing structured feedback guidelines and rubrics can help ensure
consistency and quality in the feedback process.
•
Managing Peer Dynamics: Strategies such as rotating feedback partners and ensuring anonymity can
mitigate the influence of peer dynamics on the feedback process.
•
Regular Reflection: Encouraging students to reflect on the feedback received and set specific goals
for improvement can enhance their learning experience.
In conclusion, this study provides strong evidence that structured peer feedback is an effective and feasible
strategy for enhancing the speaking skills of gifted students in resource-limited educational settings. The
significant improvements in speaking abilities, increased confidence, and development of critical thinking
skills underscore the value of peer feedback as a pedagogical tool. By addressing the identified challenges and
implementing the recommended strategies, educators can further enhance the effectiveness of peer feedback
systems and contribute to the overall improvement of English language education in similar contexts.
B. Recommendations for Future Research
While this study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of structured peer feedback in enhancing the
speaking skills of gifted students, several areas warrant further investigation. Future research should build on
the findings of this study to deepen our understanding of peer feedback systems and explore their application
in various educational contexts.
1. Larger and More Diverse Samples
Future studies should involve larger and more diverse samples to enhance the generalizability of the findings.
Research could include students from multiple schools across different regions, including urban and rural
areas,
to
examine
how
peer
feedback
systems
function
in
varied
educational
settings.
Additionally,
23
incorporating students with different levels of language proficiency and from various cultural backgrounds
can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the system’s effectiveness.
2. Longitudinal Studies
Longitudinal studies are needed to assess the long-term impact of peer feedback on students' speaking skills.
While this study demonstrated significant improvements over one semester, future research should track
students' progress over multiple semesters or academic years to determine the sustainability of the benefits.
Longitudinal data can also help identify the optimal duration and frequency of peer feedback sessions for
sustained improvement.
3. Enhancing Feedback Quality
Given the variability in feedback quality observed in this study, future research should explore methods to
improve the consistency and effectiveness of peer feedback. Investigating different training models, such as
peer coaching or mentorship programs, can provide insights into how best to equip students with the skills
needed to give high-quality feedback. Additionally, research could explore the use of technology, such as
online platforms or apps, to facilitate structured and standardized feedback processes.
4. Addressing Peer Dynamics
Further research is needed to understand and mitigate the influence of peer dynamics on the feedback process.
Studies could investigate the psychological and social factors that affect how students give and receive
feedback and develop strategies to promote a more objective and supportive peer feedback environment.
Exploring techniques such as anonymized feedback, peer feedback rotations, and group feedback sessions
could help reduce biases and improve the authenticity of the feedback.
5. Comparative Studies
Comparative studies that evaluate peer feedback against other feedback mechanisms, such as teacher feedback
or self-assessment, would provide valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of different approaches.
Such studies can help identify the unique advantages and limitations of peer feedback and guide educators in
choosing the most appropriate feedback methods for their specific contexts.
6. Integration with Technology
Investigating the integration of technology in peer feedback systems could reveal new ways to enhance the
process. Future research could explore the use of digital tools for recording and analyzing speaking
performances, providing instant feedback, and facilitating peer-to-peer interaction. Technology can also help
scale peer feedback systems, making them more accessible and manageable in larger or resource-limited
classrooms.
7. Impact on Different Language Skills
While this study focused on speaking skills, future research should examine the impact of peer feedback on
other language skills, such as writing, listening, and reading. Understanding how peer feedback influences
different aspects of language proficiency can provide a more holistic view of its benefits and inform
comprehensive language education strategies.
8. Teacher Training and Professional Development
Research should also explore the role of teacher training and professional development in the successful
implementation of peer feedback systems. Studies could investigate how different training programs affect
teachers' ability to facilitate peer feedback sessions effectively and support their students. Additionally,
research could examine the impact of teachers' attitudes and practices on the outcomes of peer feedback
interventions.
9. Cross-Cultural Studies
Cross-cultural studies can provide insights into how cultural factors influence the effectiveness of peer
feedback systems. Research could compare the implementation and outcomes of peer feedback in different
cultural contexts to identify cultural nuances and adaptations needed for successful application. Understanding
these differences can help tailor peer feedback systems to be culturally responsive and effective in diverse
educational settings.
In conclusion, while this study provides a strong foundation for understanding the impact of structured peer
feedback on speaking skills, there are numerous opportunities for further research. By addressing the identified
limitations and exploring new dimensions of peer feedback systems, future studies can contribute to a deeper
and more comprehensive understanding of this pedagogical approach. These efforts will ultimately enhance
the effectiveness of peer feedback in language education and support the development of eloquent and
confident speakers in diverse educational contexts.
24
VII. References
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge University Press.
Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis
comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322.
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer
feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304-315.
Harris, C. R. (2015). Language Arts for Gifted Students. In Teaching Language Arts to Gifted Students.
Hoang, V. V. (2018). The Current Situation and Issues of the Teaching of English in Vietnam. VNU Journal
of Science: Education Research, 31(4), 1-15.
Le, V. C. (2011). Form-focused Instruction: A Case Study of Vietnamese Teachers' Beliefs and Practices.
TESL-EJ, 15(4), 1-27.
Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher
Education, 11(3), 279-290.
Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge University Press.
Nguyen, H. T. (2017). Implementing Project-Based Learning in Vietnamese Classrooms: Opportunities and
Challenges. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 33(3), 55-64.
Nguyen, N. T., & Le, T. Q. (2019). English Language Education in Vietnam: Current Trends and Future
Directions. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), 972-977.
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer
review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
Pham, H. H. (2013). A Case Study of Vietnamese Teachers' Beliefs about Grammar Teaching. Language
Teaching Research, 17(3), 376-395.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s workplace. Business
Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 453-465.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30.
Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and user acceptance of peer rating in EFL writing classrooms.
Language Teaching Research, 8(1), 31-54.
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational
Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Topping, K. J. (2010). Peers as a source of formative and summative assessment. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek
(Eds.), Handbook of Formative Assessment (pp. 61-74). Routledge.
Tran, T. T. (2015). Large Class Size in Vietnam: Effects on Teaching and Learning. Journal of Vietnamese
Studies, 10(2), 151-168.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. MIT Press.
25
VIII. Appendices
Appendix A: Pre- and Post-Intervention Speaking Assessment Rubric
Speaking Assessment Rubric
Criteria
Excellent (5)
Good (4)
Satisfactory
(3)
Needs
Improvement
(2)
Unsatisfactory
(1)
Fluency
Speaks
smoothly with
little to no
hesitation.
Speaks
smoothly with
minor
hesitations.
Occasional
hesitations but
maintains
overall fluency.
Frequent
hesitations that
affect fluency.
Very hesitant
and disjointed
speech.
Coherence
Ideas are
clearly and
logically
organized.
Ideas are
mostly
organized with
minor lapses.
Some logical
organization
but occasional
lapses.
Ideas are
somewhat
disorganized.
Ideas are
disorganized
and hard to
follow.
Pronunciation
Clear
pronunciation
with accurate
intonation and
stress.
Generally clear
with minor
pronunciation
errors.
Understandable
but noticeable
pronunciation
errors.
Frequent
pronunciation
errors that
affect
understanding.
Poor
pronunciation
that makes
understanding
difficult.
Vocabulary
Use
Uses a wide
range of
vocabulary
accurately and
appropriately.
Good range of
vocabulary with
minor
inaccuracies.
Adequate
vocabulary with
some
inaccuracies.
Limited
vocabulary that
affects
expression.
Very limited
vocabulary that
severely
restricts
communication.
Overall
Eloquence
Highly
articulate and
persuasive.
Articulate and
generally
persuasive.
Adequately
articulate with
some
persuasiveness.
Somewhat
articulate but
not very
persuasive.
Not articulate
and lacks
persuasiveness.
26
Appendix B: Student Survey and Questionnaire
Student Survey: Perceptions of Peer Feedback
Part 1: Demographic Information
1.
Age: _____
2.
Gender: _____
3.
Grade: _____
Part 2: Likert Scale Questions
Please rate the following statements on a scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).
1.
I found the peer feedback sessions helpful in improving my speaking skills.
1
2
3
4
5
2.
The feedback I received from my peers was constructive and useful.
1
2
3
4
5
3.
I feel more confident speaking in front of others after participating in the peer feedback sessions.
1
2
3
4
5
4.
Giving feedback to my peers helped me improve my own speaking skills.
1
2
3
4
5
5.
I enjoyed participating in the peer feedback sessions.
1
2
3
4
5
Part 3: Open-Ended Questions
1.
What did you find most helpful about the peer feedback sessions?
o
2.
What challenges did you face during the peer feedback sessions?
o
3.
How do you think the peer feedback sessions could be improved?
o
27
Appendix C: Teacher Interview Guide
Teacher Interview Questions
1.
How would you describe the overall effectiveness of the peer feedback system in improving students'
speaking skills?
o
2.
What benefits did you observe from the peer feedback sessions?
o
3.
What challenges did you encounter while implementing the peer feedback system?
o
4.
How did the students respond to the peer feedback sessions?
o
5.
What suggestions do you have for improving the peer feedback system?
o
28
Appendix D: Focus Group Discussion Guide
Focus Group Discussion Questions
1.
How did you feel about giving and receiving feedback from your peers?
o
2.
Can you describe a specific instance where peer feedback helped you improve your speaking skills?
o
3.
What were some challenges you faced during the peer feedback sessions?
o
4.
How did the peer feedback sessions affect your confidence in speaking?
o
5.
What changes would you suggest to make the peer feedback sessions more effective?
o
29
Appendix E: Classroom Observation Checklist
Observation Checklist
•
Student Engagement:
o
High engagement: _____
o
Moderate engagement: _____
o
Low engagement: _____
•
Quality of Feedback:
o
Detailed and constructive feedback: _____
o
General feedback with some specifics: _____
o
Minimal or vague feedback: _____
•
Classroom Atmosphere:
o
Positive and supportive: _____
o
Neutral: _____
o
Tense or unsupportive: _____
•
Teacher Facilitation:
o
Active facilitation: _____
o
Occasional facilitation: _____
o
Minimal facilitation: _____
30
Appendix F: Student Journal Prompts
Student Journal Prompts
1.
Reflect on the feedback you received from your peers today. What did you find most helpful?
o
2.
What are your goals for improving your speaking skills based on the feedback you received?
o
3.
How did giving feedback to your peers help you think about your own speaking skills?
o
4.
Describe any challenges you faced during the peer feedback session.
o
5.
What steps will you take to address the areas for improvement mentioned in the feedback?
o
