RESEARCH ARTICLE · International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature · 2013

Contributory Role of Collaborative Assessment in Improving Critical Thinking and Writing

Mowla Miri

Read original paper ↗

See where this research leads.

A citation map has not been saved for this paper yet.

Open in your workspace →Open your workspace to prepare the citation network.

The paper record is available below. Preparing a network uses the existing account and source-allowance controls.

Papers that cite this work

No saved citation network is available; this does not mean the paper has no citations.

The evidence behind the map

Publication record

Research article.

Abstract

Instilling critical thinking skills in language learners’ mind and enhancing second language writing are gaining momentum in the field of English language teaching. Though some approaches to meeting these objectives have been proposed, review of the literature revealed that the contributory role of collaborative assessment in fostering critical thinking and second language writing has been overlooked to date. Thus, this study was conducted to delve into this issue. To this aim, two intact intermediate EFL classes in Iran, each of which contains 18 learners, were included in the study; they were randomly assigned to Student-Student (S-S) collaborative assessment and Teacher-Student (T-S) collaborative assessment groups. After receiving six sessions of treatment, both groups wrote an essay on an IELTS topic. Results of the study indicated that collaborative assessment, regardless of its type, has the potential to foster critical thinking and writing proficiency. Further, it came to light that S-S collaborative assessment group significantly outperformed the T-S collaborative assessment group in terms of gains in critical thinking and writing proficiency. In light of the findings, language teachers are suggested to involve learners in collaborative assessment processes; further, some suggestions are offered at the end to show some fruitful avenues for further research.

Coverage and freshness

Citation coverage has not been established for this paper.

Counts describe saved source records; repository versions may appear separately. A completed source query is not a complete or live citation census. A citation does not prove endorsement or research quality. Counts depend on publication age and index coverage. Colors identify research areas; positions are for readability.

Source: Saved OpenAlex scholarly metadata. Visits to this public page do not acquire new provider data.

Report a correction