Perceived Helpfulness of Peer Editing Activities: First-Year Students' Views and Writing Performance Outcomes

Ludemann, Pamela M.; McMakin, Deborah

doi:10.2304/plat.2014.13.2.129

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As authentic writing tasks concern selfgenerated texts and may affect students' grades, students may be inclined and incentivized to provide peer feedback and respond to received feedback more seriously (McDowell 2012). Qualitative inquiries in authentic contexts indicate that students can perceive the benefits of providing peer feedback (Chen 2010), and that they may even consider this more beneficial to their learning than receiving feedback from peers (Ludemann and McMakin 2014;McConlogue 2015;Nicol, Thomson, and Breslin 2014). The current study's first central aim is to compare the impact that providing versus receiving peer feedback has on students' academic writing performance.…”

Section: Providing Versus Receiving Peer Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance

Huisman

Saab

Driel

et al. 2018

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

223

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

van Driel b and Paul van den Broek c a leiden university graduate school of teaching (iclon), leiden, the netherlands; b melbourne graduate school of teaching, the university of melbourne, melbourne, Australia; c department of educational science, leiden university, leiden, the netherlands ABSTRACT Within the higher education context, peer feedback is frequently applied as an instructional method. Research on the learning mechanisms involved in the peer feedback process has covered aspects of both providing and receiving feedback. However, a direct comparison of the impact that providing and receiving peer feedback has on students' writing performance is still lacking. The current study compared the writing performance of undergraduate students (N = 83) who either provided or received anonymous written peer feedback in the context of an authentic academic writing task. In addition, we investigated whether students' peer feedback perceptions were related to the nature of the peer feedback they received and to writing performance. Results showed that both providing and receiving feedback led to similar improvements of writing performance. The presence of explanatory comments positively related both to how adequate students perceived the peer feedback to be, as well as to students' willingness to improve based upon it. However, no direct relation was found between these peer feedback perceptions and students' writing performance increase. The reader as evaluator imposes additional goals or criteria on the text… In a sense then, the process of evaluation simply turns up the power on the reading process: It enlarges the set of constraints that the mental representation one is building must meet and turns reading into testing. (Flower et al. 1986, 23)

show abstract

Section: Providing Versus Receiving Peer Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance

Huisman

Saab

Driel

et al. 2018

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

223

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, reflection is reinforced because, when articulating an evaluation judgment, the feedback provider must offer a coherent explanation. Although peer feedback is also mediated by students' perceptions of the critique they have received [17,23], typically students perceive the benefits of providing feedback rather than receiving it [17,24,25]. Generally, in mediating peer feedback, students who provide and receive feedback are more motivated when seeing themselves totally involved in the activities undertaken in class [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supportive Peer Feedback in Tertiary Education: Analysis of Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To acquire knowledge about student-mediated peer-to-peer collaborative activities, pre-service teachers’ perceptions of peer feedback are analyzed and categorized as receiver, provider, or cognitive feedback. A questionnaire of 15 survey questions concerning supportive feedback from peers was designed and validated using assessments from more than 200 pre-service teachers. The questionnaire was aligned with the activities promoting supportive feedback between pre-service teachers from three bachelor’s degrees at a tertiary education institution. Their perceptions were then quantified in terms of the peer feedback categories. While there were significant correlations between the scores for all 15 questions, real insights were produced when the highest correlations were analyzed. As such, being involved as both feedback providers and receivers was highly rated. The self-efficacy of pre-service teachers receiving feedback, (i.e., the extent to which peer instructional strategies and the selected learning tasks were cognitively challenging so as to improve receiver feedback), proved to be correlated with their perceptions of involvement, autonomy, and structure. Likewise, motivation for providing or receiving feedback was also closely correlated with the self-efficacy of pre-service teachers providing feedback. Finally, all three questions in the cognitive feedback category were highly correlated. The pre-service teachers were, thus, motivated to improve their learning and considered feedback as a useful task and as a way to strengthen their relationships with their peers.

show abstract

“…However, as the course progressed they wrote two, and then all three distractors for four questions each week, eventually along with the question stem and the correct response. In addition to the steady increase in the difficulty and scope of their task, the assignment design included weekly double-blind peer reviews of questions written by three classmates, reflecting that peer reviewers often learn more from providing than from receiving feedback (Ludemann & McMakin 2014).…”

Section: Renewable Assignments (Eg Student-created Quiz Questions)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective

Bali

Cronin

Jhangiani

2020

Journal of Interactive Media in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter's (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser's model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.

show abstract

Perceived Helpfulness of Peer Editing Activities: First-Year Students' Views and Writing Performance Outcomes

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance

Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance

Supportive Peer Feedback in Tertiary Education: Analysis of Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions

Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About