Claims

Paper-and-pen peer comment activities significantly improve students' writing quality over a semester

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Control-group students receiving face-to-face paper-and-pen peer comments showed a statistically significant pre-test to post-test gain in writing quality. → Ho 2020

Evidence

Ho 2020

Ho, P. V. P., Phung, L. T. K., Oanh, T. T. T., & Giao, N. Q. (2020). Should Peer E-Comments Replace Traditional Peer Comments? International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 295-314. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13120a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Paired-sample t-test on the control group (n=40) in a 15-week quasi-experiment at Ho Chi Minh City University of Science; the mean rose from 5.715 to 6.495 with "p= .000", so the article concludes paper-and-pen peer comment activities affect writing quality.

"The average pre -test score (M=5.715, SD=.878) is lower than the average post -test score (M=6.495; SD= .955), and the Sig. for the comparison of the average scores of the pre -test and post -test is p= .000."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.