Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 48 no. 2 (2025)

Enhancing English Writing Proficiency through Peer Feedback Strategies: A Quasi-Experimental Study among Grade 8 Students

Jorah Tiongco | Fe Marie Abergas

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

English writing proficiency is critical for academic and professional success in the Philippine K-12 curriculum, yet rural students face challenges such as limited instructional resources and mother-tongue interference. This quasiexperimental study investigated the impact of peer feedback strategies—structured peer reviews and collaborative editing—on writing proficiency among 60 Grade 8 students at a rural high school in Dimataling District, Zamboanga del Sur. Over eight weeks, the experimental group (n = 30) engaged in peer feedback activities, while the control group (n = 30) received traditional teacher-led instruction. Pre- and post-tests utilized a 100-point writing rubric (α = .89) assessing content, organization, grammar, and vocabulary. The experimental group showed significant improvement (pre: M = 50.23, SD = 7.12; post: M = 68.45, SD = 8.03), t(29) = 6.78, p < .001, d = 1.62, compared and minimal control gains (pre: M = 49.78, SD = 6.89; post: M = 53.12, SD = 7.34), t(29) = 1.48, p = .149, d = 0.30. Between-group differences were significant, t(58) = 5.92, p < .001, d = 1.50. Peer feedback mitigated rural barriers like low confidence through collaborative support. Recommendations include the integration of peer feedback training and policy support by DepEd for rural writing programs. This contributes to K-12 goals for communicative competence in ESL settings.



References:

  1. Adling, N. M. J. (2022). Flexible blended learning experiences of Filipino students in an English as a second language (ESL) learning context. Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching, 6(1), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v6i1.5104
  2. Alvarez, A. V., Jr. (2020). Learning from the problems and challenges in blended learning: Basis for faculty development and program enhancement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 112–132. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4292631
  3. Bai, B. (2023). Pedagogical adaptations in rural ESL teaching: A case study in material development. Journal of Multilingual Education, 8(2), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2023.2187345
  4. Barrot, J. S. (2018). K-12 English curriculum: Issues and prospects. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27(4), 289-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0390-5
  5. Bayron, A. B., Jr. (2023). Challenging issues in rural secondary education. Sprin Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(03), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.55559/sjahss.v2i03.95
  6. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand McNally. https://www.rand.org/pubs/commercial_books/CB108.html
  7. Capinding, A. T. (2022). Utilization of ‘Quizizz’ a game-based assessment: An instructional strategy in secondary education science 10. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(4), 1959–1967. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.4.1959
  8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203771587/statistical-power-analysis-behavioral-sciences-jacob-cohen
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design/book255675
  10. Department of Education. (2016). K to 12 curriculum guide: English. DepEd. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/English-CG_with-tagged-materials.pdf
  11. Department of Education. (2023). National learning recovery program. DepEd. https://www.deped.gov.ph/nlrp/
  12. DepEd Zamboanga del Sur. (2023). Annual educational performance report. DepEd Region IX. https://www.deped.gov.ph/regions/region-ix/
  13. Education First. (2023). English proficiency index. https://www.ef.com/wwen/epi/
  14. España-Delgado, J. A. (2023). Kahoot, Quizizz, and Quizalize in the English class and their impact on motivation. HOW, 30(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.30.1.641
  15. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
  16. Flores Quiroz, M., Gutiérrez, R., Rocha, F., Valenzuela, M. P., & Vilches, C. (2021). Improving English vocabulary learning through Kahoot!: A quasi-experimental high school experience. Teaching English with Technology, 21(2), 3-13. http://www.tewtjournal.org/issues/volume-21-issue-2/
  17. Graham, S., Liu, X., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., Barkel, A., Kavanaugh, C., & Talukdar, J. (2021). Reading for writing: A meta-analysis of the impact of reading interventions on writing. Review of Educational Research, 91(2), 243-284. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321997007
  18. Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/second-language-writing/6B5C7C1D7A1B1B6B7E1B1C1B6B7E1B1C
  19. Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman. https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/input-hypothesis-9780582553804/
  20. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  21. Nguyen, X. H., & Le, T. T. A. (2024). The impact of Kahoot! and Quizizz to teach English tenses for Flyers. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 7(4), 2016–2024. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i4-04
  22. OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results: Combined executive summaries. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_results.htm
  23. Philippine Health Research Ethics Board (PHREB). (2017). National ethical guidelines for health and health-related research. http://www.ethics.healthresearch.ph/index.php/downloads
  24. Philippine Institute for Development Studies. (2023). Socio-economic barriers in rural education: A policy brief. PIDS. https://www.pids.gov.ph/publications
  25. Pramudita, R. F. (2023). Quizizz as technology to enhance EFL students’ active participation in the classroom. Journal of English in Academic and Professional Communication, 9(1), 11-18. https://doi.org/10.25047/jeapco.v9i1.3933
  26. Rosario, V. (2024). Exploring literature teaching challenges among secondary level school teachers in a rural area of an English as a second language (L2) country. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(7), 678–684. https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0234
  27. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
  28. Topping, K. J. (2018). Peer assessment: Channels of learning. Education Sciences, 8(4), 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040181
  29. UNESCO. (2023). Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000385723
  30. Villanueva, J. A. R., Redmond, P., Galligan, L., & Eacersall, D. (2023). Investigating blended learning interactions in Philippine schools through the community of inquiry framework. Asia Pacific Education Review, 24(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09826-4
  31. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674576292
  32. Yazon, A. D., Manaig, K. A., Tamban, V. E., & Sapin, S. B. (2023). Effectiveness of interactive classroom tool: A quasi-experiment in assessing students’ engagement and performance in Mathematics 10 using ClassPoint. Applied Quantitative Analysis (AQA), 3(1), 80-90. https://doi.org/10.31098/quant.1601
  33.  

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic