Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: a multiple case study

Poverjuc, Oxana; Brooks, Valerie; Wray, David

doi:10.1080/13562517.2011.641008

Cited by 28 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Measured by the FQI (Prins et al ., ), the results of the present study revealed that students in the elaborate structure condition have significantly higher feedback quality scores compared to students who received merely some guiding questions or who received no additional structure at all. This is in line with previous experimental studies, which claim that structure is beneficial for the PA process (e.g., Gielen & De Wever, ) and which underline the need for structure and support to ensure effective feedback (e.g., Poverjuc et al ., ). More specifically, offering students a peer feedback form including a criteria‐oriented list structured according the three feedback principles feed up, feedback and feed forward (Hattie & Timperley, ) appears to be an effective approach to increase significantly the peer feedback quality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…As mentioned above, PA can be seen as an example of a more complex learning task that requires high-level cognitive processing; however, such high-level PA processes hardly happen spontaneously (Kollar & Fischer, 2010). Previous studies pointed out the need for structure and support to ensure effective feedback (e.g., Poverjuc, Brooks, & Wray, 2012). Recently, research questioned what type of support is essential for the assessor and assessee to promote high quality feedback (Hovardas, Tsivitanidou, & Zacharia, 2014).…”

Section: Structuring the Peer Feedback Process To Optimize Feedback Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structuring the peer assessment process: a multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality

Gielen

Wever

2015

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Structuring the Peer Feedback Process To Optimize Feedback Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structuring the peer assessment process: a multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality

Gielen

Wever

2015

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with university students, research students including master's and doctoral students are different due to their English proficiency levels, learning experiences, academic writing purposes, ages, the nature of their study programmes, personal beliefs, and other contextual factors. Although there are a few studies on teacher feedback/supervisor feedback on postgraduates and doctoral students’ L2 writing (Bitchener & Basturkmen 2010; Kumar & Stracke 2011; Yu & Lee 2013), less research has been conducted to explore peer feedback in L2 academic and scholarly writing (Chen 2010; McGarrell 2010; Hu & Lam 2010; Poverjuc, Brooks & Wray 2012; Crossman & Kite 2012; Zhu & Mitchell 2012). While Chen (2010) revealed that Taiwanese master's students held positive attitudes toward providing and receiving peer feedback and peer comments were related to higher order issues, Poverjuc et al (2012) found that master's students’ lack of prior peer feedback experience and their perceptions of peers’ inability to provide valid feedback constituted potential barriers to the success of peer feedback.…”

Section: Context and Peer Feedback Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014)

Lee

2016

Lang. Teach.

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews research on peer feedback in second language (L2) writing published in the last decade (i.e. 2005–2014). We analyse first the theoretical underpinnings that have informed both peer feedback research and the pedagogical use of peer feedback in L2 writing instruction. We also provide a critical interpretation of existing peer feedback research and discuss seven important themes emerging from the literature, that is, (1) effectiveness of peer feedback compared with teacher and self-feedback; (2) benefits of peer feedback for feedback-givers; (3) computer-mediated peer feedback; (4) peer feedback training; (5) student stances and motives; (6) peer interaction and group dynamics; and (7) cultural issues in peer feedback. Next, we examine the contextual and methodological issues in peer feedback research and then conclude the article with implications for future research.

show abstract

“…Research therefore suggests that providing additional support is necessary for optimizing students' feedback, and might even be an essential precondition for peer assessment (Poverjuc, Brooks, & Wray, 2012). The most common approach consists of providing support to the assessor, through explications of assessment criteria in the form of checklists, inventories, response grids, marking schedules, or rubrics (Falchikov, 1995;Gielen & De Wever, 2015c;Panadero & Jonsson, 2013;K.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using feedback requests to actively involve assessees in peer assessment: effects on the assessor’s feedback content and assessee’s agreement with feedback

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criticizing the common approach of supporting peer assessment through providing assessors with an explication of assessment criteria, recent insights on peer assessment call for support focussing on assessees, who often assume a passive role of receivers of feedback. Feedback requests, which require assessees to formulate their specific needs for feedback, have therefore been put forward as an alternative to supporting peer assessment, even though there is little known about their exact impact on feedback. Operationalizing effective feedback as feedback that (1) elaborates on the evaluation, and (2) to which the receiver is agreeable, the present study examines how these two variables are affected by feedback requests, compared to an explanation of assessment criteria in the form of a content checklist. Situated against the backdrop of a writing task for 125 first-year students in an educational studies program at university, the study uses a 2x2 factorial design that resulted in four conditions: a control, feedback request, content checklist, and combination condition. The results underline the importance of taking message length into account when studying the effects of support for peer assessment. Although feedback requests did not have an impact on the raw number of elaborations, the proportion of informative elaborations within feedback messages was significantly higher in conditions that used a feedback request. In other words, it appears that the feedback request stimulated students to write more focused messages. The use of a feedback request did, however, not have a significant effect on agreement with feedback.

show abstract

Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: a multiple case study

Cited by 28 publications

References 29 publications

Structuring the peer assessment process: a multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality

Structuring the peer assessment process: a multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality

Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014)

Using feedback requests to actively involve assessees in peer assessment: effects on the assessor’s feedback content and assessee’s agreement with feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About