Peer feedback often has positive effects on student learning processes and outcomes. However, students may not always be honest when giving and receiving peer feedback as they are likely to be biased due to peer relations, peer characteristics and personal preferences. To alleviate these biases, anonymous peer feedback was investigated in the current research. Research suggests that the expertise of the reviewer influences the perceived usefulness of the feedback. Therefore, this research investigated the relationship between expertise and the perceptions of peer feedback in a writing assignment of 41 students in higher education with a multilevel analysis. The results show that students perceive peer feedback as more adequate when knowing the reviewer perceives him/herself to have a high level of expertise. Furthermore, the results suggest that students who received feedback from a peer who perceives their expertise as closer to the reviewee's own perceived expertise was more willing to improve his or her own assignment.
Track recommendations provided to students in the final grade of primary education lead the allocation to specific school tracks in secondary education in the Netherlands. Where the results of a standardised test indicate that students are able to go to a higher track level, primary schools are required to reconsider and potentially adjust the track recommendation to a higher level. The current research aimed to (1) investigate trends in the level of track recommendations, double track recommendations and reconsiderations over the years 2014–2015 to 2018–2019, (2) explore the variation in (trends of) track recommendations between Dutch primary schools and their school boards, and (3) assess the association between track recommendations and the school level variables degree of urbanisation and type of primary education. We used multilevel growth curve modelling for continuous and count data based on publicly available school‐level population data regarding track recommendations and school leavers tests from 2014–2015 to 2018–2019. The number of double track recommendations has increased over the cohorts, with a slightly decreasing gap between schools in rural and urban areas. The number of reconsiderations first decreased and then increased. The differences in reconsiderations between rural and urban areas are increasing over time. An initial trend towards higher average recommendations stabilising in the later cohorts appeared with no clear pattern for degree of urbanisation. The current study adds to the existing knowledge by assessing longitudinal trends instead of cross‐sectional analyses and including multiple stakeholders and factors simultaneously.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.