The present study examines the added value of structuring the peer assessment process, by providing students with a peer feedback template with a varying structuring degree, for the peer feedback content quality in a wiki environment in higher education. The present study took place in the 1st year of a university course in Instructional Sciences (N=176) and more specifically compared three conditions: no structure peer feedback (control), basic structure peer feedback, and elaborate structure peer feedback condition. Quantitative content analysis of students' (n=41) peer feedback messages was performed, and analyses of (co)variance revealed some discrepancies between the conditions regarding the proportion of peer feedback content categories: (1) peer feedback style, (2) verification type, (3) verification focus, (4) elaboration type, and (5) elaboration focus. This study demonstrated that a higher structuring degree in a peer feedback template during the peer assessment process can have an impact on peer feedback content with respect to the abovementioned categories the peer feedback content. Results revealed significant differences between the three conditions regarding the peer feedback content categories. This study illustrated how a practical instructional intervention in the feedback process can increase the potential impact of peer assessment and boost students' learning in higher education.

In order to optimize students' peer feedback processes, this study investigates how an instructional intervention in the peer assessment process can have a beneficial effect on students' performance in a wiki environment in first‐year higher education. The main aim was to study the effect of integrating a peer feedback template with a varying structuring degree. The present study involved three conditions: a no structure, a basic structure and an elaborate structure condition. Due to a clear hierarchical structure, in which over time (level 1), 168 students (level 2) are nested within 37 groups (level 3), multilevel analysis was performed to examine the effect of time, student and group level influences on students' peer feedback quality and product scores. The results revealed that both peer feedback quality and product scores increase significantly for all conditions over time, after multiple practice occasions. In addition, after several practice occasions, significant differences were found between the conditions in both peer feedback (elaborate higher than no structure) and product scores (elaborate and basic higher than no structure). Building on this, limitations, directions for future research and practical implications are presented.

This study investigates how an instructional intervention focused on engaging both the assessor and assessee in the peer feedback process can be advantageous for the quality of students' peer feedback and written product in a wiki-based computer-supported collaborative learning environment in the first year of higher education. The main aim was to examine the effect of structuring the role of the assessee and/or assessor by respectively providing them with a peer feedback request and/or content checklist, together with a structured peer feedback template. The present study adopted a 2x2 design, in which four conditions were compared: (1) a control condition, (2) a feedback request condition, (3) a content checklist condition, and (4) a combination (feedback request + content checklist) condition. Every student (N=125) belonged to a group (n=27) of five and had to fulfil three consecutive assignments, each consisting of writing an abstract for a scientific paper in the wiki. The results revealed that the quality of both peer feedback and the final product increased for all conditions over time, but no significant differences were found between the conditions at time 2 and time 3. However, when the role of the assessee is structured to request for particular peer feedback, this appeared to be favourable for the peer feedback scores, but only at the initial stage of performance. Building on this, limitations, practical implications, and directions for future research are presented.

Postprint version ofDe Wever, B., Hämäläinen, R., Voet, M., & Gielen, M. (2015). A wiki task for first-year university students: The effect of scripting students' collaboration. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 37-44. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.12 The UGent Institutional Repository is the electronic archiving and dissemination platform for all UGent research publications. Ghent University has implemented a mandate stipulating that all academic publications of UGent researchers should be deposited and archived in this repository. Except for items where current copyright restrictions apply, these papers are available in Open Access.This item is the archived peer-reviewed author-version of: Developing authentic learning environments in higher education calls for pedagogical approaches to foster online collaborative learning. The main aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a collaboration script for a wiki task. A collaboration script is a set of instructions to improve collaboration between learning partners. Participants were first-year university students in Educational Sciences (N=186) collaborating in groups of five during a three-week period to create a wiki on peer assessment in education. Two conditions were contrasted: a scripted and a non-scripted condition. The effect of scripting was measured in four ways (questionnaires, log-file analyses, group product scores, and individual pre-posttest scores). Results show significant positive effects of scripting with respect to the collaborative group processes and students' feelings of shared responsibility. No significant effects of scripting were found with respect to the developed wiki products. As for students' individual learning outcomes, results showed a significant increase from pre-to post-test for all students. Although the increase was higher in the scripted condition, the difference between the conditions was not statistically significant. KeywordsWiki, script, collaboration, collaborative learning 2 A wiki task for first-year university students: the effect of scripting students' collaboration