- Aghaee, N., & Hansson, H. (2013). Peer portal: Quality enhancement in thesis writing using self-managed peer review on a mass scale. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14, 186–203. [Google Scholar]
- Bayaga, A., & Wadesango, N. (2013). Assessment – enabling participation in academic discourse and implications. South African Journal of Education, 33, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Bester, G., & Brand, L. (2013). The effect of technology on learner attention and achievement in the classroom. South African Journal of Education, 33, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7–74. [Google Scholar]
- Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 219–233. [Google Scholar]
- Elwood, J. A., & Bode, J. (2014). Student preferences vis-à-vis teacher feedback in university EFL writing classes in Japan. System, 42, 333–343. [Google Scholar]
- Gleason, J. (2014). “It helps me get closer to their writing experience” Classroom ethnography and the role of technology in third-year FL courses. System, 47, 125–138. [Google Scholar]
- Grosser, M. M., & Nel, M. (2013). The relationship between the critical thinking skills and the academic language proficiency of prospective teachers. South African Journal of Education, 33, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Hanjani, A. M., & Li, L. (2014). Exploring L2 writers’ collaborative revision interactions and their writing performance. System, 44, 101–114. [Google Scholar]
- Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112. [Google Scholar]
- Ho, M. C., & Savignon, S. J. (2007). Face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review in EFL writing. CALICO Journal, 24, 269–290. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, G. (2005). Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research, 9, 321–342. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, G., & Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science, 38, 371–94. [Google Scholar]
- Humphreys, G., & Wyatt, M. (2013). Helping Vietnamese university learners to become more autonomous. ELT Journal, 68, 52–63. [Google Scholar]
- Kleijn, R. A. M., Mainhard, M. T., Meijer, P. C., Brekelmans, M., & Pilot, A. (2013). Master’s thesis projects: Student perceptions of supervisor feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38, 1012–1026. [Google Scholar]
- Lam, R. (2013). The relationship between assessment types and text revision. ELT Journal, 67, 446–458. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Z., Link, S., Ma, H., Yang, H., & Hegelheimer, V. (2014). The role of automated evaluation holistic scores in the ESL classroom. System, 44, 66–78. [Google Scholar]
- Liou, H. C., & Peng, Z. Y. (2009). Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System, 37, 514–525. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, J., & Law, N. (2012). Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback. Instructional Science, 40, 257–275. [Google Scholar]
- Mak, P., & Lee, I. (2014). Implementing assessment for learning in L2 learning: An activity theory perspective. System, 47, 73–87. [Google Scholar]
- Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265–289. [Google Scholar]
- Phillips, S. (2007). Automated essay scoring: A literature review. Kelowna, BC: Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education. [Google Scholar]
- Razı, S. (2011). Advanced reading and writing skills in ELT: APA style handbook. Ankara: Nobel. [Google Scholar]
- Razı, S. (2013). Assessing academic writing: Development of a rubric and relating Turnitin reports. Paper presented at International Conference on Interdisciplinary Research in Education, Kyrenia, Cyprus. [Google Scholar]
- Rinehart, D., & Chen, S. J. (2012). The benefits of a cycle of corrective feedback on L2 writing. Saarbrücken, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Robinson, J. M. (2002). In search of fairness: An application of multi-reviewer anonymous peer review in a large class. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26, 183–192. [Google Scholar]
- Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59, 23–31. [Google Scholar]
- Ruecker, T. (2010). The potential of dual-language cross-cultural peer review. ELT Journal, 65, 398–407. [Google Scholar]
- Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and user acceptance of peer rating in EFL writing classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 8, 31–54. [Google Scholar]
- Turnitin. (2010). The scientific basis of Turnitin: Research on effective writing pedagogy and practice. Retrieved from http://pages.turnitin.com/rs/iparadigms/images/Turnitin_Scientifically-based_Research_Review_med.pdf [Google Scholar]
- Turnitin. (2014). Research study: Turnitin effectiveness in U.S. Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http://pages.turnitin.com/rs/iparadigms/images/Turnitin-Effectiveness-HE.pdf?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRolvK%2FPZKXonjHpfsX67%2B0qX6C1h4kz2EFye%2BLIHETpodcMScViPa%2BTFAwTG5toziV8R7nCJM1s0dkQWRHh [Google Scholar]
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Weissberg, R. (2006). Scaffolded feedback: Theoretical conversations with advanced L2 writers. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 246-265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Wette, R. (2014). Teachers’ practices in EAP writing instruction: Use of models and modeling. System, 42, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, H. (2014). Investigating teacher-supported peer assessment for EFL writing. ELT Journal, 68, 155–168. [Google Scholar]
|