Error detection tasks and peer feedback for engaging physics students

Abstract

We show how Error-Detection Tasks (EDT) are an effective way for students to practice giving peer feedback. In EDT, students are presented with a solved physics problem, prepared by a fictional in-class peer, containing one or more errors -algebraic, procedural, or conceptual. Students must identify and explain how to correct the error(s), as though they were explaining it to the "peer" who wrote the solution. EDTs have been developed for a web-based learning platform (myDALITE.org) that provides students with asynchronous peer instruction such that students can provide feedback and evaluate feedback from other students. Results show that students trained with EDT significantly outperform a control group in correctly identifying errors and providing more meaningful feedback to their fictional in-class peer.

Does Learning from Giving Feedback Depend on the Product Being Reviewed: Concept Maps or Answers to Test Questions?

“…However, the difference is in the way information is presented: answers to open-ended test questions present information more explicitly than concept maps, which may make a mistake more obvious and the process of giving feedback easier. Giving feedback on answers to open-ended test questions includes identifying mistakes in the answers, which is also called an error-detection task (Adams et al, 2019). Such tasks are widely used in many school subjects: students need to find a mistake in a given sentence or example, explain what the mistake is and suggest a correction.…”

“…This makes answers to test questions much more common and familiar products to review. Moreover, according to Adams et al (2019), training students in errordetection tasks leads not only to their identifying more mistakes, but also to their giving better feedback to peers about those mistakes. In other words, if students practice these tasks often enough, they can give better feedback.…”

Giving feedback to peers

“…On the one hand, reviewing concept maps might lead to better conceptual learning (and, thus, higher post-test scores) than reviewing answers to test questions, as concept maps help to visualise relationships between key concepts (e.g., Schroeder et al, 2018). On the other hand, test answers are more familiar to students and present information in a more straightforward way than concept maps, which might lead to noticing and explaining more mistakes and, thus, to better learning (e.g., Adams et al, 2019). However, the conditions did not show a statistically significant difference in post-test scores (with pre-test scores not being statistically significant either).…”

“…Giving feedback on answers to open-ended test questions includes identifying mistakes in the answers, which is also called an error-detection task (Adams at al., 2019). Such tasks are widely used in many school subjects: students need to find a mistake in a given sentence or example, explain what the mistake is and suggest a correction.…”

“…This makes answers to test questions much more common and familiar products to review. Moreover, according to Adams et al (2019), training students in error-detection tasks leads not only to their identifying more mistakes, but also to their giving better feedback to peers about those mistakes. In other words, if students practice these tasks often enough, they can give better feedback.…”