{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02527075812274368, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002888086642599278, 'mean_word_length': 5.328767123287672, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Study of Students' Self-Regulated Revision on Writing

Student writing development is not likely to happen without revision. In this computer-assisted learning era, revision is increasingly practiced as a self-regulated process. Students can regulate their revision behaviors through cognitive strategies like goal-setting or social strategies like peer review. We examined possible effects of writing goals together with peer review on college students‘ self-regulated revision in order to better understand how to enhance that revision. We asked one research question in particular. What kinds and effects of revisions did students produce in the digital learning context of the current study? 52 U.S. college students participated in this study. During the 16week semester, students were instructed to write two papers (with writing goals written at the end), each in two drafts. When they finished writing each draft, they submitted documents into an online writing and peer review system (Peerceptiv), reviewed peer papers, gave required comments and ratings, wrote reflections based on peer review, and then revised and resubmitted their drafts. We found that students made targeted revisions. High level revisions occupied a bigger percentage in terms of changes of sentence numbers. Revision-caused writing score improvement was not tremendous, but statistically significant.