Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2, 1156-1167 2025 Publisher: Learning Gate DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2024 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate History: Received: 23 December 2024; Revised: 28 January 2025; Accepted: 1 February 2025; Published: 11 February 2025 * Correspondence: 383730287@qq.com Research on cultivating paths of English writing ability of high school students based on peer feedback from the correction network Zhang Bo1*, Abu Bakar Razali2, Lilliati Ismail3 1,2,3Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia; 383730287@qq.com (Z.B.). Abstract: Most senior high school students face many difficulties in English writing, such as having nothing to say, being unorganized, using a single sentence pattern, and making frequent grammatical errors, which not only affect the quality of their writing but also increase their fear and powerlessness regarding writing. The purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness of peer feedback on senior high school students' English writing ability. The study adopts a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods and takes two parallel English classes in an urban public high school as the research subjects. Through a semester of experimental teaching, it conducts a comparative analysis of the changes in students' English writing anxiety levels and writing performance in the experimental class (with peer feedback from the correction network) and the control class (with traditional teacher feedback). The results show that the level of English writing anxiety among the students in the experimental class significantly decreased, and their writing performance significantly improved, while the changes in these two aspects for the students in the control class were not significant. The qualitative analysis further reveals the positive effect of peer feedback on improving students' writing ability and reducing their writing anxiety. The results of the study have implications for the teaching of English writing in senior high schools and suggest that teachers should attach importance to sentence practice, strengthen writing feedback, and optimize error correction methods in daily teaching to improve students' English writing ability. Keywords: Correction Network, Cultivating Paths, English Writing Ability, High School Students, Peer Feedback. 1. Introduction Most high school students are afraid of English writing. In the process of writing, I usually feel that I have nothing to say. I write whatever sentence I think of. The article is not organized. The sentence patterns in the composition are very single, almost all of them are simple sentences. But when I use these simple sentences to express my ideas, I usually can't express my ideas clearly [1]. At the same time, there are many grammatical errors in these simple sentences, such as the lack of predicate. Verb usage is wrong, person and number are inconsistent, articles are wrong and so on. Although students often recite a lot of grammar rules and do a lot of exercises, these exercises are not effective in improving writing ability, and writing still fails to meet the requirements of the new curriculum standard. These mistakes in writing increase student’s fear and powerlessness of writing, and make students feel that it is difficult to improve their writing level [2]. Teachers still use traditional teaching methods, which are of little help to students' writing. There are few systematic English writing classes in schools. Usually, English writing is often assigned by teachers, and students use their spare time to complete the writing independently. Teachers spend a lot of time correcting the compositions submitted by students one by one. Teachers correct the compositions by marking the mistakes with a red pen, and then give students grades or scores. Although this method takes a lot of energy, the effort is not proportional to the return, because the 1157 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate feedback information students get is usually errors and grades, and they do not understand what errors appear in their compositions [3]. In addition, middle school students lack perseverance and self- learning ability, so students often do not know how to revise the teacher's annotations, nor are they willing to spend time to understand them. The teacher corrected again and again, and the mistakes appeared again and again. Teachers have worked hard, but students' writing scores have not been improved, and mistakes in writing are still repeated, so teachers often feel exhausted, helpless, and very confused about English writing teaching [4]. Teachers and students have made great efforts, but the results are not satisfactory, so in the actual English teaching, they are more willing to put their energy into the teaching of vocabulary, grammar and reading comprehension practice. In the process of language learning, it is inevitable to make mistakes. Mistakes themselves are the basic part of the theory of error analysis, which can reflect the essence of language [5]. In this paper, high school students in the final test composition as the research object, to analyze the errors in the composition, to explore the causes of errors, and to give some teaching suggestions for the causes of errors, the purpose is to provide some help for front-line teachers and high school students. To help teachers understand the writing situation of students in their classes, to understand what types of errors students have in their writing, what proportion different types of errors account for in the total number of errors, what types of errors students make the most errors and the differences of writing errors in different learning stages, through the important information of error feedback, teachers can adjust the teaching content. Change teaching strategies to improve teaching efficiency and improve students' writing level [6]. The process of writing is an extremely complex cognitive psychological process, which is influenced by many factors, one of which is emotional factors. Anxiety is an important variable of affective factors in English learning, which has a great influence on the development of senior high school students' writing ability. This paper adopts a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods, taking business English writing anxiety as the breakthrough point, and taking the peer feedback of the correction website as the experimental teaching background, to explore whether the peer feedback of the correction website can affect students' business English writing anxiety and business English writing ability. 2. Basic Theories 2.1. Peer Feedback In the process of learning, feedback helps to improve learners' learning ability and consolidate learning outcomes. In the teaching of writing, feedback refers to the input from the reader to the writer, whose function is to provide the writer with information for revising the composition. The improvement of students' writing level is influenced by the feedback of writing [7]. Peer feedback is a form of feedback. It means that in the process of writing and revising, students form study groups, read each other's articles, and make suggestions for revision in oral or written form. Cooperative learning theory, Vygotsky's "scaffolding" theory and the "interactive" teaching concept in second language acquisition are the theoretical basis of peer feedback. According to the theory of cooperative learning, in group activities, language learning can be encouraged by discussing and negotiating the meaning of language among group members. In the process of writing teaching, effective peer feedback can help learners understand their writing works from the standpoint of readers, and contribute to the cultivation of student’s reader awareness. Cooperative learning theory holds that learners actively construct knowledge through the information provided by others in the process of learning, which can promote the learning of learners and others [8]. Vygotsky, in his theory of the Zone of Proximal Development, proposes that peer assistance can improve and develop writing skills. Peer feedback provides an opportunity for an individual's zone of proximal development to manifest itself through the help of others. These three theories all emphasize that the teacher's teaching is not the only way to acquire language knowledge, and language learning is not an individual's behavior, but through the help of teachers or peers, through the negotiation of meaning in group activities. Studies have shown that peer 1158 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate suggestions can help learners think deeply, create "audience" for learners' exercises, and improve learners' autonomous learning ability, etc. 2.2. Correction Network Correction network is an online English writing platform, which uses corpus-based and cloud computing technology to provide automatic online correction services for English compositions. This system can give the scores, comments and sentence-by-sentence comments of compositions in time, aiming at improving the efficiency of teachers in correcting English compositions and improving student’s English writing ability. The services of the correction network have been adopted by more than 5000 schools. Developed by Beijing Ciwang Technology Co., Ltd., Juku Correction Network has been used on a large scale since April 2011. It is the earliest and largest automatic English writing marking system in China with accurate intelligent scoring and convenient operation. Its working principle is to process the learner corpus submitted by the user, compare and analyze it with the standard corpus data, and measure the distance data between them. This distance data can automatically analyze and evaluate texts from 192 language analysis dimensions, identify spelling, tense, pragmatic and other language errors, and judge the language quality of texts by training language models and using scoring algorithms [9]. In a very short time, the system can be converted into feedback contents such as scores, general comments and sentence-by-sentence comments that can be understood by users, and provide sentence-by-sentence feedback and modification suggestions. Compared with the traditional manual review, Juku correction network has the advantages of fast, consistent standards and multi-round iterative revision, so it has been widely used and academically verified. Its main features include: (1) It has a fast and efficient ability, the system can give grades and comments in a very short time, greatly improve the efficiency of correction, so that students can quickly find and correct errors in the composition, but also can help teachers more accurately evaluate students' writing ability. (2) Scoring is objective and fair. The system can automatically identify common errors such as vocabulary, collocation and grammar, and provide suggestions for revision, eliminate the interference of subjective factors, and ensure the objective consistency of scoring. (3) Personalization and pertinence are prominent. The system can provide personalized guidance and improvement programs according to the actual writing level and needs of students, and promote the improvement of student’s autonomous learning ability [10]. It has changed the traditional teaching methods of English writing, improved teaching efficiency, and helped students better master the skills of English writing, which is an important tool for English writing education in China. 2.3. Writing Anxiety Writing anxiety was first proposed by Daly & Miller, which is a specific situational anxiety related to writing and one of the important emotional factors affecting writing. Individuals with high anxiety usually think that writing is unfulfilling or even punitive, so they often choose to avoid writing tasks. Writing anxiety causes difficulties in writing production, which hinders the smooth progress of writing process and the efficient completion of writing tasks. High anxiety led to lower quality of writing tasks, shorter articles, and lower quality of language expression and sentence structure [11]. Writing anxiety is considered to be one of the most important factors affecting language learning. Foreign language anxiety is an important affective factor in the process of learning English. Writing anxiety refers to the specific psychological anxiety behavior of learners in the process of writing. Writing anxiety brings pressure to second language writers, and they lose confidence in the process of writing, which hinders the smooth progress of the writing process and brings difficulties to learners. Relevant studies have found that English writing anxiety is prevalent in the process of college students' English writing, and that students' writing anxiety is high, which leads to low writing quality, and that writing anxiety hinders learners from improving their writing ability [12]. This anxiety may come from learners' doubts about their writing ability, or from the pressure of teachers and classmates. Writing anxiety will 1159 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate affect students' thinking and expression in English writing, and serious writing anxiety will also affect students' academic performance and physical and mental health. Therefore, teachers should help students relieve their writing anxiety so that they can express their ideas bravely and improve their English writing ability [13]. However, as one of the affective factors of English learners, writing anxiety has not received due attention, and there is a lack of systematic empirical research on writing anxiety and how to reduce it. In order to further understand the effect of Web-based peer feedback on writing anxiety and writing ability, this study takes senior high school students as the subjects, and the research questions to be answered include: (1) Is there any change in students' English writing anxiety after the implementation of Web-based peer feedback in teaching? (2) What is the effect of peer feedback on students' English writing performance? 3. Research Design and Implementation 3.1. Research Samples The purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness of peer feedback based on the correction network on the cultivation of high school students' English writing ability [14]. To this end, we carefully designed the selection and grouping of the study sample to ensure the reliability and validity of the results. The research samples were selected from two English parallel classes in an urban public high school, namely, Class 1 and Class 2 of Senior One. There are 40 students in each class, making a total of 80. The reason for choosing these two classes is that their basic English level is similar and their scores in the English writing ability test at the beginning of the semester are comparable, which provides a fair starting point for the experiment. In addition, students in both classes have basic computer skills and are proficient in using the correction network for peer feedback. Before the beginning of the experiment, we introduced and explained the two classes of students in detail to ensure that they understood the purpose and process of the study, and obtained their consent and their parents. On the premise of voluntary participation, the students in the two classes were randomly divided into the experimental class and the control class. The experimental class (Class 1 of Senior One) will adopt the method of peer feedback in English writing teaching, while the control class (Class 2 of Senior One) will continue to adopt the traditional method of English writing teaching, that is, teachers directly correct. In terms of sample characteristics, we have made a detailed record of the students in the two classes, including their gender, English achievement, learning habits, participation in extracurricular English activities and so on. This information will help us better understand the background of the sample and provide a reference for subsequent data analysis. In addition, we also recorded the students' English writing anxiety level in order to study whether peer feedback can reduce the students' writing anxiety [15]. In order to ensure the balance of the experiment, we unified the English teaching resources, teaching time and teaching content of the two classes. The English courses for both classes are taught by the same senior English teacher, who has rich teaching experience and deep understanding of English writing teaching. Before the beginning of the experiment, teachers were trained on how to use the correction network to conduct peer feedback to ensure the smooth running of the experiment. The sample we have chosen is somewhat representative. The students in these two classes represent the general characteristics of current senior high school students, and their English level and learning background can reflect the actual situation of most senior high school students. Therefore, the results of this study are expected to provide a reference for the teaching of English writing in other high schools. In the course of the experiment, we will dynamically monitor the sample, record the participation of students, the quality of feedback and the progress of student’s writing [16]. These data will provide us with valuable first-hand information to help us evaluate the effectiveness of peer feedback in English writing teaching. 1160 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Through the above sample selection and design, we hope to get a scientific and reasonable research sample, and provide a solid foundation for exploring the path of cultivating high school students' English writing ability based on peer feedback. 3.2. Research Tools In this study, in order to comprehensively evaluate the effect of peer feedback on senior high school students' English writing ability, we used a variety of research instruments, among which the Foreign Language Writing Anxiety Scale is one of the key instruments [17]. The following is a detailed description of the Foreign Language Writing Anxiety Scale and other research instruments. The Foreign Language Writing Anxiety Scale was designed based on Cheng [18] scale, which has been widely used to assess learners' anxiety level during writing. The scale contains 22 items, which are related to various anxiety situations that may be encountered in the writing process, such as fear of writing tasks, doubts about writing ability, and worries about evaluation. Each item was scored on a 5- point scale, ranging from "completely nonconforming" to "completely conforming," to quantify the level of student anxiety. The applicability of Cheng [18] scale in this study is that it can accurately capture the emotional responses of high school students in the process of English writing. Through this scale, the researcher can know the change of students' anxiety before and after the experiment, so as to evaluate the effect of peer feedback on alleviating writing anxiety. Before the beginning of the experiment (pre-test), we assessed the foreign language writing anxiety of students in two classes to obtain baseline data. At the end of the experiment (post-test), the same scale was used again to observe the change of students' anxiety level during the experiment. The scoring of the scale was completed independently by the investigator to ensure objectivity and consistency of the scoring. The scores of the scale will be analyzed by descriptive statistics, including calculating the average score, standard deviation and so on, to describe the anxiety level of students. In addition, t-test will be used to compare the difference of anxiety level before and after the experiment and between the experimental class and the control class. In addition to the foreign language writing anxiety scale, we also designed a peer feedback record form. This record sheet is used to record the performance of students in the peer feedback process, including the frequency, quality and improvement after feedback. The record form is filled out by both the teacher and the student to ensure that the information is comprehensive and accurate. In order to evaluate the quality of peer feedback, we developed a set of evaluation criteria, including the dimensions of accuracy, constructiveness and timeliness of feedback. These criteria will be used to guide students on how to provide effective feedback and also serve as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of peer feedback. Questionnaires and interviews were used to collect students' direct feedback on their experience of peer feedback. The questionnaire design included both quantitative questions (e.g., the Likert scale) and qualitative questions (e.g., open-ended questions). The interview was conducted in a semi-structured form, aiming at gaining an in-depth understanding of student’s feelings, opinions and suggestions. 3.3. Research Implementation The experimental period is one semester, 16 weeks in total, and one English writing class is arranged every week. The syllabus and textbooks of the experimental class and the control class are consistent to ensure the consistency of the teaching content. The teaching steps of the experimental class are as follows. In the first week of the experiment, the students in the experimental class were trained on peer feedback, including the significance, methods and matters needing attention of peer feedback. In the weekly writing class, the teacher assigns a writing task and provides corresponding writing instructions. Students completed the writing task after class and gave peer feedback in the following week's writing class. Students are divided into groups of four. The group members read each other's compositions and make suggestions for revision on the correction website. Teachers are there to guide and ensure the quality and efficiency of feedback. At the end of peer feedback, teachers comment 1161 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate on each composition and provide professional suggestions for revision. After each peer feedback, the teacher will organize the students to summarize the feedback and discuss the gains and problems in the feedback process. Through the combination of peer feedback and teacher feedback, students learn and improve in practice, and gradually improve their English writing ability [19]. The control class follows the traditional teaching mode, that is, after the students complete the writing task, the teacher directly corrects and comments. Throughout the experiment, the teacher will record student writing performance, the quality of peer feedback, and student responses for detailed analysis and evaluation at the end of the experiment. 4. Findings and Discussion 4.1. Quantitative Research Results In order to evaluate the effect of peer feedback on foreign language writing anxiety of senior high school students, we conducted a pretest and post-test on foreign language writing anxiety of students in the experimental class and the control class. The following are the statistics of the test results before and after the experiment. Table 1. Difference of average scores before and after foreign language writing anxiety test. Class type Number of people Average pretest score Average score of post-test Pre-post test difference (t value) Significance (two- tailed test) Experimental class 40 65.24 58.76 5.321 0 Control class 40 64.89 65.15 0.376 0.707 Table 1 shows that the average score of foreign language writing anxiety of the students in the experimental class before the experiment is 65.24, and the average score after the experiment is 58.76. There is a significant difference before and after the experiment (t = 5.321, p < 0.001), indicating that the level of foreign language writing anxiety of the students in the experimental class has decreased significantly. In contrast, the level of foreign language writing anxiety of the students in the control class rises slightly from 64.89 before the experiment to 65.15 after the experiment, and the difference is not significant (t = 0.376, p = 0.707), which indicates that the traditional teaching method has no significant effect on students' foreign language writing anxiety. Table 2. Differences in foreign language writing anxiety between groups. Level type Number of people Average pretest score Average score of posttest Between-group difference (t-value) Significance (Two- tailed test) Experimental class 40 65.24 58.76 -3.467 0.001 Control class 40 64.89 65.15 0 0 Table 2 shows the differences between the experimental class and the control class in the level of foreign language writing anxiety before and after the experiment. Before the experiment, there was no significant difference in anxiety levels between the two groups (t = 0.582, p = 0.561). However, after the experiment, the anxiety level of the experimental class was significantly lower than that of the control class (t = -3.467, p = 0.001), which further confirmed the positive effect of peer feedback on reducing students' foreign language writing anxiety. In order to evaluate the effect of peer feedback on English writing achievement, we conducted a pretest and a post-test on the English writing ability of the students in the experimental class and the control class. The following are the statistics of the test results before and after the experiment. 1162 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 3. Difference of average scores before and after English writing test. Class type Number of people Average pretest score Average score of posttest Pre-post test difference (t value) Significance (two-tailed test) Experimental class 40 75.43 82.67 -6.204 0 Table 3 shows that the average English writing score of the students in the experimental class before the experiment is 75.43, and the average score after the experiment is 82.67. There is a significant difference between the pre-test and the post-test (t = -6.204, p < 0.001), indicating that the English writing score of the students in the experimental class has improved significantly. In contrast, the English writing scores of the students in the control class increased from 76.19 before the experiment to 77.84 after the experiment, but the difference was not significant (t = -1.356, p = 0.177), indicating that the traditional teaching method has limited effect on improving students' English writing scores. Table 4. Intergroup differences in English writing achievement. Class type Number of people Average pretest score Average score of posttest Between-group difference (t-value) Significance (two- tailed test) Experimental class 40 75.43 82.67 4.567 0 Control class 40 76.19 77.84 0 0 Table 4 shows the differences in English writing scores between the experimental class and the control class before and after the experiment. Before the experiment, there was no significant difference in writing scores between the two groups (t = -0.543, p = 0.588). However, after the experiment, the writing performance of the experimental class was significantly higher than that of the control class (t = 4.567, p < 0.001), indicating the effectiveness of peer feedback in improving students' English writing ability. 4.2. Qualitative Research Results Through questionnaires and interviews, we collected students' attitudes and feelings about peer feedback. Most students had positive attitudes toward peer feedback. They believe that peer feedback provides a platform for mutual learning and helps them learn different writing skills and expressions from other people's compositions. In addition, peer feedback also improved their critical thinking skills and enabled them to evaluate their compositions more objectively [20]. Some students reported that peer feedback reduced their anxiety about writing. They are no longer so afraid of writing because they know that their peers will provide constructive feedback to help them improve. Students believed that by reading and evaluating their peers' compositions, they were better able to understand the writing requirements and avoid similar mistakes in their own compositions. Although most of the feedback was positive, some students suggested improvements. They want their peers to be able to offer more specific suggestions for changes than just pointing out mistakes [21]. After peer feedback, the language errors in the compositions of high school students decreased significantly. Peer feedback helped them notice grammar and spelling mistakes that they would normally overlook. Peer feedback encourages students to think deeply about the topic of their compositions, and improves the depth of content and the logic of argument in their compositions [22]. Peer feedback helps students to realize the importance of composition structure, and they can better organize the composition after feedback, so that its structure is clearer. Peer feedback stimulated students' creative thinking, and they tried to use more rhetorical devices and rich vocabulary to express their views [23]. Peer feedback promoted students' self-reflection. After reading peer feedback, they were able to evaluate their writing more objectively and think about how to improve it. 1163 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate To sum up, both the quantitative and qualitative results show that peer feedback has a positive impact on the development of senior high school students' English writing ability. Peer feedback not only improved students' writing performance, but also reduced their writing anxiety and promoted their self-reflection and autonomous learning [24]. 4.3. Discussion of Results After experiencing peer feedback for one semester, the students in the experimental class showed a significant decrease in their English writing anxiety. This finding is consistent with the findings of Cheng [18] that effective feedback can reduce students' writing anxiety. In this study, peer feedback provided a non-threatening environment in which students wrote with peer encouragement and support, reducing concerns about teacher evaluation [25]. In addition, the immediacy and interactivity of peer feedback may also help students identify and solve problems more quickly, thus alleviating uncertainty and anxiety in the writing process. Qualitative data further revealed how peer feedback affected students' writing anxiety. Student feedback showed that they appreciated positive peer reviews and constructive criticism, which boosted their self-confidence and encouraged them to become more active in writing activities [26]. The anonymity of peer feedback may also help reduce students' feelings of shame and make them more willing to share and discuss problems in writing. The results also show that peer feedback has a significant positive effect on the improvement of students' English writing ability. Students in the experimental class showed a significant improvement in their performance on the writing test, which may be attributed to the fact that peer feedback facilitated interaction and discussion among students, helping them to view their writing from different perspectives and learn from it. The reciprocal nature of peer feedback may also have stimulated competition among students, encouraging them to improve the quality of their writing for better evaluation [27]. Through peer feedback, students have the opportunity to practice expressing their thoughts clearly and accurately while also learning how to provide effective feedback. This two-way communication improved their language awareness and writing strategies, enabling them to better organize and express their ideas [28]. In addition, peer feedback may also enhance students' self- monitoring ability, enabling them to evaluate and improve their writing more independently. Teachers' guidance and supervision in the process of peer feedback cannot be ignored. Teachers not only need to properly train students before the start of the experiment and ensure that they can effectively give and receive feedback, but also need to provide continuous support and guidance throughout the process. Teachers' timely intervention is helpful to solve the problems that students may encounter in the process of feedback, and to ensure the quality and effectiveness of feedback [29]. 5. Cultivating Paths of English Writing Ability of High School Students 5.1. Pay Attention to Sentence Practice Through error analysis, we find that syntactic errors rank first in the total number of errors, which is a common problem among students, and through sentence length distribution, we find that most of the sentences used by students in writing are short sentences, which shows that student’s ability to choose words and make sentences is relatively weak, so teachers should pay attention to sentence practice in teaching. First of all, to help students have a clear understanding of sentence patterns, clear sentence types and sentence elements in English. Secondly, from simplicity to depth, from easy to difficult, gradually train student’s ability to choose words and make sentences [30]. At the beginning, we can train students' ability to form sentences by connecting words into sentences, and make clear the different components of different words in sentences, which is helpful for students to grasp the structure of sentences [31]. It is less difficult to form sentences with conjunctions, which can not only cultivate student’s ability to make sentences, but also enhance their self-confidence in learning English. Then, encourage students to imitate and make sentences. According to the sentence patterns that students make many mistakes, we should carry out targeted imitation exercises. Students from easy to difficult, gradually clear the sentence components, write the correct sentence, at the same time overcome the fear 1164 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate of long sentences, so as to help students effectively write the correct English sentence. Sentences are based on the mastery of grammar knowledge, using words to express their ideas, so the practice of sentences is also a process of consolidating grammar and mastering grammar. Explaining and practicing grammar alone is not only boring but also not conducive to understanding [32]. Practicing the form of sentences will reduce the difficulty and resolve the difficulties of grammar knowledge. 5.2. Reinforce Feedback on Writing Appropriate feedback from the experiment is helpful to the improvement of students' English writing level, so teachers should pay attention to the teaching strategy of feedback in daily teaching. First of all, the teacher's feedback should be timely. Teachers usually have a heavy task, in order to avoid the delay of feedback after students submit their compositions, which will affect the effect, teachers can give targeted feedback. For example, teachers can choose a certain aspect of the problem to focus on feedback according to the key and difficult points of teaching and the actual situation of students. Such feedback is both targeted and timely, and the effect is better. Feedback can be divided into teacher feedback and peer feedback. Teachers can make good use of peer feedback, which is also very beneficial to students [33]. Students are very enthusiastic about finding mistakes for their peers, which not only helps other students, but also consolidates and tests their knowledge. But when peer feedback, teachers should put forward clear requirements for student’s correction and formulate good standards, which not only maintains students' enthusiasm for learning, but also achieves the purpose of error correction [34]. Feedback refers not only to the teacher's feedback to the students, but also the teacher's attention to the students' feedback to the teacher, such as whether the students understand the teacher's correction of the composition, whether the students have revised the composition carefully, whether the students have revised the composition carefully, and whether the students have revised the composition carefully. Whether students have good enthusiasm for learning, etc. [35]. Only in this way can student’s writing level be improved, because teaching is an activity in which teachers and students participate together. 5.3. Optimize the Error Correction Method Students are bound to make mistakes in the process of learning English. Teachers should have a correct attitude towards mistakes, and they should not correct them or let them go. If teachers focus on student’s grammatical errors and correct them, they will discourage students' enthusiasm for learning. If we blindly pursue the fluency of expression and let mistakes go, some mistakes will eventually be fossilized. First, select the appropriate error correction strategy [36]. Some of the students' writing errors are regular errors, such as: tense, subject-predicate agreement; Some errors are irregular, such as preposition, fixed collocation, etc. Teachers should use different strategies to correct different errors [37]. Secondly, error correction should be clear. When correcting errors, we should not only mark the errors, but also clearly mark the correct expression methods. In view of the errors, teachers can give language feedback to students, and the effect of error correction will be better. In other words, when correcting errors, we should not only mark the errors, but also clarify the correct usage, and the error correction must be specific and clear. Then, teachers should pay attention to the attitude of error correction. Error correction is a long-term and complex process, and the purpose of error correction is to improve students' writing level [38]. Therefore, in the process of correcting errors, teachers should be patient with student’s mistakes, protect students' enthusiasm, and do not frustrate students' confidence. Finally, the corrector refers not only to the teacher, but also to himself and his classmates [39]. Some mistakes can be corrected by students themselves, so encourage them to correct them by themselves. Students with different levels can correct each other, which can not only increase the unity among students, but also gain a sense of achievement and enhance their confidence in learning English. If there are some mistakes that the students can't correct, then the teacher will correct them collectively. 1165 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate 6. Conclusions Writing is an important but challenging part in senior high school English teaching. Many students feel anxious when writing in English, which leads to poor writing performance. Traditional writing teaching methods, especially single teacher feedback, are often inefficient and difficult to meet students' learning needs. Therefore, it is very important to explore more effective writing teaching methods to improve students' English writing ability. In this thesis, two English parallel classes in an urban public high school are selected as the subjects of the study by combining quantitative and qualitative methods. The main conclusions are as follows: 1. Peer feedback can effectively reduce English writing anxiety of senior high school students and improve their writing performance. 2. Peer feedback provides a non-threatening environment to encourage students to actively participate in writing activities and enhance their self-confidence. 3. Peer feedback promotes interaction and discussion among students, helping them to see their writing from different perspectives and learn from it. 4. Peer feedback improves students' language awareness and writing strategies, and enables them to better organize and express their ideas. Future research can expand the sample to include students from different schools and different backgrounds to verify the general applicability of peer feedback to the development of English writing ability. We should further study how to train students to conduct effective peer feedback and how to evaluate the effect of peer feedback to ensure that the positive effect of peer feedback can be maximized. Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing. Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. This open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). References [1] H. F. Shang, "Exploring online peer feedback and automated corrective feedback on EFL writing performance," Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 4–16, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1636078 [2] L. Cheng, P. Ben, and Y. Qiao, "Research on automatic error correction method in English writing based on deep neural network," Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, vol. 2022, no. 1, p. 2709255, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2709255 [3] T. López-Pellisa, N. Rotger, and F. Rodríguez-Gallego, "Collaborative writing at work: Peer feedback in a blended learning environment," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1293-1310, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10312-2 [4] S. Chollampatt, D. T. Hoang, and H. T. Ng, "Adapting grammatical error correction based on the native language of writers with neural network joint models," in Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D16-1195, 2016, pp. 1901-1911. [5] Q. Li, "An English writing grammar error correction technology based on similarity algorithm," Security and Communication Networks, vol. 2022, no. 1, p. 3690789, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3690789 [6] L. Tian and Y. Zhou, "Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context," System, vol. 91, p. 102247, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102247 [7] Y. Han and Y. Xu, "The development of student feedback literacy: The influences of teacher feedback on peer feedback," Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 680-696, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545 [8] L. Hu, Y. Tang, X. Wu, and J. Zeng, "Considering optimization of English grammar error correction based on neural network," Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 34, pp. 1-13, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-06919-0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1636078 https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2709255 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10312-2 https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D16-1195 https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3690789 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102247 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-06919-0 1166 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [9] S. Latifi, O. Noroozi, J. Hatami, and H. J. Biemans, "How does online peer feedback improve argumentative essay writing and learning?," Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 195-206, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1742767 [10] B. Shen, B. Bai, and W. Xue, "The effects of peer assessment on learner autonomy: An empirical study in a Chinese college English writing class," Studies in Educational Evaluation, vol. 64, p. 100821, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100821 [11] P. V. P. Ho, L. T. K. Phung, T. T. T. Oanh, and N. Q. Giao, "Should peer E-comments replace traditional Peer comments?," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 295-314, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13120a [12] O. Noroozi, J. Hatami, A. Bayat, S. Van Ginkel, H. J. Biemans, and M. Mulder, "Students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing, and content learning: Does gender matter?," Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 698-712, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200 [13] M. Zaki, "Self‐correction through corpus‐based Tasks: Improving Writing Skills of Arabic Learners," International Journal of Applied Linguistics, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 193-210, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12313 [14] J.-J. Tsao, "Effects of EFL learners’ L2 writing self-efficacy on engagement with written corrective feedback," The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 575-584, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00581-0 [15] J. Zhang and L. J. Zhang, "The effect of feedback on metacognitive strategy use in EFL writing," Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 37, no. 5-6, pp. 1198-1223, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2048551 [16] H. Wang, "The significance of the convolutional deep learning model in the intelligent collaborative correction of English writing," 3c Tecnología: Glosas de Innovación Aplicadas a la Pyme, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 142-157, 2023. https://doi.org/10.17993/3ctecno.2023.v12n1e40.142-157 [17] S.-Y. Chien, G.-J. Hwang, and M. S.-Y. Jong, "Effects of peer assessment within the context of spherical video-based virtual reality on EFL students’ English-Speaking performance and learning perceptions," Computers & Education, vol. 146, p. 103751, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103751 [18] Y.-S. Cheng, "A measure of second language writing anxiety: Scale development and preliminary validation," Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 313-335, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.07.001 [19] S. Yu and C. Liu, "Improving student feedback literacy in academic writing: An evidence-based framework," Assessing Writing, vol. 48, p. 100525, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100525 [20] N. Putri and D. Aminatun, "Using Facebook to practice writing skill: What do the students think?," Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 45-50, 2021. [21] M. H. Hoomanfard and M. Rahimi, "A comparative study of the efficacy of teacher and peer online written corrective feedback on EFL learners' writing ability," Zabanpazhuhi (Journal of Language Research, vol. 11, no. 33, pp. 327-352, 2020. https://doi.org/10.22051/JLR.2020.31212.1860 [22] R. Shadiev and Y. Feng, "Using automated corrective feedback tools in language learning: A review study," Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2538-2566, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1933540 [23] K. Misiejuk, B. Wasson, and K. Egelandsdal, "Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 117, p. 106658, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658 [24] S. Yu, L. Jiang, and N. Zhou, "Investigating what feedback practices contribute to students’ writing motivation and engagement in Chinese EFL context: A large scale study," Assessing Writing, vol. 44, p. 100451, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100451 [25] S. Link, M. Mehrzad, and M. Rahimi, "Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision, and writing improvement," Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 605-634, 2022. [26] J. Li and L. Mak, "The effects of using an online collaboration tool on college students’ learning of academic writing skills," System, vol. 105, p. 102712, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102712 [27] H. Li, Y. Xiong, C. V. Hunter, X. Guo, and R. Tywoniw, "Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta- analysis," Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 193-211, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679 [28] Y. Dai and Z. Wu, "Mobile-assisted pronunciation learning with feedback from peers and/or automatic speech recognition: A mixed-methods study," Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 36, no. 5-6, pp. 861-884, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1933541 [29] F. Teng, "Tertiary-level students’ English writing performance and metacognitive awareness: A group metacognitive support perspective," Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 551-568, 2020. [30] M. A. Alharbi, "Exploring the potential of Google Doc in facilitating innovative teaching and learning practices in an EFL writing course," Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 227-242, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1501695 [31] K. Guo and D. Wang, "To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 8435-8463, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11623-4 [32] J. Wilson and R. D. Roscoe, "Automated writing evaluation and feedback: Multiple metrics of efficacy," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 87-125, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119830764 https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1742767 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100821 https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13120a https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200 https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12313 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00581-0 https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2048551 https://doi.org/10.17993/3ctecno.2023.v12n1e40.142-157 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103751 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.07.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100525 https://doi.org/10.22051/JLR.2020.31212.1860 https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1933540 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100451 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102712 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679 https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1933541 https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1501695 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11623-4 https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119830764 1167 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 2: 1156-1167, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4717 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [33] M. L. Syafii and M. Z. Miftah, "Venn-diagram strategy in EFL class to enhance learners’ writing skill and motivation," Journal on English as a Foreign Language, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 141-162, 2020. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v10i1.1861 [34] Y. Kim, B. Choi, S. Kang, B. Kim, and H. Yun, "Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback: Learning outcomes and students' perceptions," Foreign Language Annals, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 176- 199, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12444 [35] R. Morris, T. Perry, and L. Wardle, "Formative assessment and feedback for learning in higher education: A systematic review," Review of Education, vol. 9, no. 3, p. e3292, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3292 [36] Y. Li and J. Flowerdew, "Teaching English for research publication purposes (ERPP): A review of language teachers’ pedagogical initiatives," English for Specific Purposes, vol. 59, pp. 29-41, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.03.002 [37] X. Lv, W. Ren, and Y. Xie, "The effects of online feedback on ESL/EFL writing: A meta-analysis," The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 643-653, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00572-3 [38] S. W. Chong, "Reconsidering student feedback literacy from an ecological perspective," Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 92-104, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1730765 [39] K. W. Chan, S. Y. Li, J. Ni, and J. J. Zhu, "What feedback matters? The role of experience in motivating crowdsourcing innovation," Production and Operations Management, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 103-126, 2021. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v10i1.1861 https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12444 https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3292 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.03.002 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00572-3 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1730765