1. Introduction

The introduction provides background on peer review and the challenges faced by L2 English learners. It discusses the use of trained peer review assessment (TPRA) and Teacher-Student Collaborative Assessment (TSCA) in English writing instruction, noting that TSCA has received little scholarly attention. The study aims to introduce TSCA and compare its effectiveness with TPRA in a 16-week-long writing instruction at a university in southwest China, focusing on changes in the number of structural elements and the improvement of argumentation substance in students' writing.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Argumentation based on Toulmin model is a framework to describe elements essential for good argumentation. It includes structural elements such as claim, data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. There are also criteria to assess argumentation substance, including acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency. Previous studies have used simplified Toulmin models to analyze students' writing and demonstrate the structural elements.

2.2 Trained Peer Review Assessment (TPRA) is a collaborative activity involving students reading, critiquing, and providing feedback on each other's writing. Previous studies have shown that peer review can improve learners' writing, but there are concerns about linguistic aspects and students' lack of knowledge and skills. Therefore, TPRA training programs have been developed to encourage peer review assessment.

2.3 Teacher-Student Collaborative Assessment (TSCA) is designed to cope with the challenges of peer review assessment in L2 settings. It contains three phases: pre-class, in-class, and after-class phases. TSCA aims to address concerns about students' English proficiency, reliance on teachers, and large class sizes in China.

3. Methodology

This chapter describes the setting and participants of the study, which included 81 sophomores from two natural classes at a university in southwestern China. The classes were divided into a TSCA group and a TPRA group. The TSCA group followed TSCA instructions for 14 weeks, while the TPRA group followed TPRA instructions. The study also detailed the assessment focuses and processes for both TSCA and TPRA methods, as well as the instruments, data coding, and scoring methods used for the study. Finally, the chapter discussed the data collection, reliability of scoring, and data analysis methodologies employed in the study.

4. Results

The analysis was conducted to record data concerning frequencies of structural elements to provide information about the presence of argumentative elements. No significant difference existed between the TPRA group and the TCSA group before instructional intervention. However, after the intervention, the TSCA group produced significantly more pieces of counterargument claim and rebuttal data. Results showed no significant between-group differences in argumentation substance scores before the intervention. After the intervention, a significant difference can be found in the argumentation substance of counterargument claim, rebuttal claim, and rebuttal data with more qualified argumentation substance produced in the TSCA group.

5. Discussion

The better performance of the TSCA group in producing counterargument claims and rebuttal data is discussed. Research shows that TSCA is effective in helping students construct refutations. The study also highlights the potential impact of the teacher's scaffolding and modeling on student performance. However, insignificant improvements were observed in both the TSCA and TPRA groups in creating claim, data, and counterargument data. analysis. The results indicate that while students have a basic awareness of composing claims, more effort is needed to reinforce their skills. In terms of data and counterargument data, students have demonstrated low performance, indicating difficulties in conceptualizing argument genre features and a scarcity of relevant evidence to support claims.

6. Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications

This chapter discussed the effects of teacher-student collaborative assessment (TSCA) in comparison to the more conventional peer review practice with teacher’s assistance before peer review (TPRA). The TSCA group showed significantly larger counterargument claims and rebuttal data, as well as superior construction of counterargument claims, rebuttal claims, and rebuttal data. The presence of structural elements in both groups was almost perfect, but more attention should be dedicated to content involving critical thinking to enhance argumentation substance. The chapter also highlighted the importance of improving students’ performance in constructing effective data to strengthen arguments, suggesting that critical thinking ability should be cultivated to create effective data. The study was supported by the China Foreign Language Education Fund and the Sichuan Research Center of Foreign Languages and Literature.