共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
Although the effects of peer feedback have been studied from a number of perspectives, much remains to be learned about what leads students to act (or not) on their peers’ feedback in revisions. The present study examined the relationship between peer feedback features, student perceptions as potential mediators (understanding versus agreement with the feedback), and the likelihood of students’ implementation of the feedback. Peer feedback, back-evaluation comments, and revisions from 185 US high school students were analyzed. Investigated feedback features included four cognitive features (identification, explanation, solution, suggestion), and two affective features (mitigating praise, hedges). Logistic regression analyses revealed that: (1) both understanding and agreement with feedback predicted implementation; (2) presence of solutions predicted understanding of feedback; (3) mitigating praise predicted agreement of the problem; and (4) explanation and hedges predicted implementation separately from perception effects. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed. 相似文献
2.
Prior research on the complex process of revision based upon peer feedback has focused on characteristics of each piece of feedback in isolation. Multipeer feedback allows for feedback to be repeated (or not), which could be a signal of feedback quality or be especially persuasive to peers. Separately, little research has examined how well peers select more impactful and accurate peer feedback in their revisions, whether repeated or not. We analyzed almost 2,000 peer comments received by 107 students in a secondary writing course in the US to determine whether feedback quality and feedback frequency predicted feedback implementation. Controlling for other feedback features and context factors, students were much more likely to implement feedback as both feedback quality and feedback frequency increased, surprisingly with no interaction (i.e., even low-quality comments were more likely to be implemented when repeated). However, low-quality comments often partially overlapped with high-quality comments, providing a potential explanation for the lack of an interaction. Finally, consideration of feedback frequency and feedback quality provides new insights into which feedback features are actually related to implementation. The results generally allay concerns about the blind-leading-the-blind in peer feedback as well as pushing for peer feedback arrangements that produce more overlapping comments. 相似文献
3.
To deepen understanding of learning through peer feedback, the current study investigated the relationships between different peer feedback activities (organized into constructive vs active activities) and learning (i.e., transfer to new tasks), examining the nature of activities within provided feedback, received feedback, and revisions in response to feedback. Across five US high schools, 367 students in Advanced Placement classes participated, implementing common assignments and peer assessment rubrics. Provided/received comments and revisions in one assignment, and writing improvements observed in a second assignment were exhaustively coded and subjected to hierarchical model regression analyses. Results showed that constructive activities (providing explanations and making revisions after receiving explanations or providing suggestions) were consistently associated with learning, whereas passive (e.g., receiving feedback without making revisions) or active activities (e.g., implementing specific suggestions) were not. Further, the effects of received feedback on learning were mediated by the number of revisions. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed. 相似文献
4.
Although the effectiveness of peer review has been examined, few have tested the joint benefits of providing and receiving feedback features and quality in L2 contexts. The present study investigated variation in key features and quality of feedback provided and received by high and low L2 proficiency students and its benefits on revision in the authentic setting of students experiencing both roles of providing and receiving peer feedback in English academic writing. Analyses on two drafts from 50 students, 1356 idea units of anonymous implementable peer feedback and back-evaluation ratings revealed that the combined effect of providing and receiving feedback on revision was prominent for all students. But the bilateral benefits of providing and receiving feedback features were more significant for high proficiency students, while providing feedback features and quality benefited low proficiency students more. The study implies that students need more bilateral training with both providing and receiving feedback. 相似文献
5.
Astrid Wichmann Alexandra Funk Nikol Rummel 《European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE》2018,33(1):165-184
The act of revising is an important aspect of academic writing. Although revision is crucial for eliminating writing errors and producing high-quality texts, research on writing expertise shows that novices rarely engage in revision activities. Providing information on writing errors by means of peer feedback has become a popular method in writing instruction. However, despite its popularity, students have difficulties in leveraging the potential of peer feedback: feedback uptake is low and students engage in little revision. Instructional support might help learners to make sense of peer feedback and to reflect on the provided information more deeply. The present study investigated the effect of sense-making support on feedback uptake as well as on revision skills, in particular problem detection and problem correction. In an experimental study, 73 university students were randomly assigned to conditions with or without sense-making support. The results indicate that feedback uptake improved concerning two out of three variables: students in the condition with sense-making support made fewer new errors and rejected more incorrect feedback comments. Students’ revision skills only improved with regard to problem detection. Overall, we were able to show that peer feedback alone might not be sufficient to make successful changes in the text and improve revision skills. Sense-making support proved to be effective to some extent and partially helped to maximize the benefits of peer feedback. 相似文献
6.
Background: Research on peer assessment has noted ambiguity among students in using peer assessment for improving their work. Previous research has explained this in terms of deficits in the student feedback, or differences in student views of what counts as high-quality work.
Purpose: This study frames peer assessment as a social process in the science classroom. The aim is to explore peer assessment in science education as social practice in order to contribute to an understanding of the affordances and constraints of using peer assessment as a learning tool in science education.
Design and Method: The study was conducted in four lower secondary school classes, school years 8 and 9, in two different schools. An intervention study was designed focussing on the topic of experimental design. It involved the students in a process of peer assessment where they designed experiments individually, and then exchanged their designs, conducted each other’s experiments, provided feedback to each other and revised their original design after discussing the feedback in groups. Data were collected in the form of audio recordings of student discussions and written work.
Results: The results show that, although not all peer feedback resulted in revisions, peer feedback was useful to the students in group interaction when negotiating quality in their work.
Conclusions: To conclude, the potential for using peer assessment in science education should not only be evaluated through the students’ revisions but also in terms of in what ways the feedback constitutes interactional resources for defining quality in student work. 相似文献
7.
Although providing feedback is commonly practiced in education, there is no general agreement regarding what type of feedback
is most helpful and why it is helpful. This study examined the relationship between various types of feedback, potential internal
mediators, and the likelihood of implementing feedback. Five main predictions were developed from the feedback literature
in writing, specifically regarding feedback features (summarization, identifying problems, providing solutions, localization,
explanations, scope, praise, and mitigating language) as they relate to potential causal mediators of problem or solution
understanding and problem or solution agreement, leading to the final outcome of feedback implementation. To empirically test
the proposed feedback model, 1,073 feedback segments from writing assessed by peers was analyzed. Feedback was collected using
SWoRD, an online peer review system. Each segment was coded for each of the feedback features, implementation, agreement,
and understanding. The correlations between the feedback features, levels of mediating variables, and implementation rates
revealed several significant relationships. Understanding was the only significant mediator of implementation. Several feedback
features were associated with understanding: including solutions, a summary of the performance, and the location of the problem
were associated with increased understanding; and explanations of problems were associated with decreased understanding. Implications
of these results are discussed.
相似文献
| Christian D. SchunnEmail: |
8.
Ye Han 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2020,45(5):680-696
AbstractAlthough the concept of student feedback literacy has drawn increasing attention in higher education, empirical research on this matter is still in its infancy. In the area of peer feedback, little research has investigated the role of teacher follow-up feedback on peer feedback in the development of student feedback literacy. To address the research gap, a multiple-case study of three Chinese master’s students enrolled in an academic writing course was conducted, drawing on the students’ drafts with peer feedback, teacher written feedback on that peer feedback, semi-structured interviews, retrospective verbal reports, observation field notes and class documents. Three students’ epistemological and practical knowledge about, attitudes towards, and self-efficacy beliefs in peer feedback were found to improve at different paces and to different degrees. However, considerable individual variations were observed with two high-achieving, highly motivated participants becoming more feedback-literate than their under-achieving, minimally motivated peer. Teacher feedback on peer feedback was found to have distinct impacts on individual students, depending on learner factors including language ability, beliefs and motivation. These findings suggest that teacher feedback on peer feedback, if consistently provided and compatible with learner factors, can scaffold both cognitive and social-affective aspects of student feedback literacy. 相似文献
9.
J. W. Gaynor 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2020,45(5):758-775
AbstractPeer review in the classroom can enhance numerous employability skills such as critical appraisal, writing skills, reflection practices and collaborative experiences. This study takes place over two years and discusses the implementation of a repeating blind peer review cycle across a single semester for final year chemistry students enrolled on a compulsory employability module. The feedback cycle promotes personal reflection through the use of mini-reflective questionnaires. The process was assessed by academic tutors at the resubmission stage and/or the peer feedback stage where the quality of peer feedback was directly assessed. The research investigates the quality of peer feedback, the importance of assessment and student perceptions of what is most useful. Methods include directed content analysis of feedback produced, student opinions and a focus group. Students were capable of offering useable feedback across a range of assessment criteria but tend to focus on the important criteria best aligned to the particular assignment. A range of motivational factors and tactics were noticed but students tended to find reviewing the most beneficial. 相似文献
10.
Rachael Ruegg 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2016,41(2):199-212
This exploratory study investigated the effect of assessing both process and product compared to assessing written products alone. Two groups of students received teacher feedback over a one-year period. One group was assessed on their revisions in addition to the quality of final drafts, while a second group was assessed on the quality of final drafts alone. The uptake of feedback, in the form of revision attempts, and the success of those attempts were compared between the two groups using a Mann–Whitney U-test. In addition, improvement in writing performance was measured and compared between the two groups using one-way analysis of variance. It was found that the group assessed on process had significantly higher uptake of feedback than the group assessed on product alone. However, the increased uptake consisted of unsuccessful revision attempts, while the number of successful revisions was almost identical between the groups. It was also found that the group assessed on final product alone improved significantly more than the group assessed on process in terms of essay content. It is concluded that the assessment of feedback may not be necessary in some contexts, and suggestions are given for increasing the quality of learning achieved by teacher feedback. 相似文献
11.
Despite the wide use of peer assessment, questions about the helpfulness of peer feedback are frequently raised. In particular, it is unknown whether, how and to what extent peer feedback can help solve problems in initial texts in complex writing tasks. We investigated this research gap by focusing on the case of writing literature reviews in an academic writing course. The dataset includes two drafts from 21 students, sampled to represent a wide range of document qualities, and 84 anonymous peer reviews, involving 1,289 idea units. Our study revealed that: (1) at both substance and high prose levels, drafts of all quality levels demonstrated more common problems on advanced writing issues (e.g. counter-argument); (2) peer feedback was driven by difficulty of the problem rather than overall draft quality, peer comments were not well aligned with the relative frequency of problems, more comments were given to less difficult problems; (3) peer feedback had a moderate impact on revision, and importantly, receiving multiple comments on the same issue led to more repairs and improvement of draft quality, but consistent with the comments received, authors tended to fix basic problems more often. Implications for practice and research are drawn from these findings. 相似文献
12.
This study investigated the effects of feedback providing improvement strategies and a reflection assignment on students’ writing motivation, process, and performance. Students in the experimental feedback condition (n = 41) received feedback including improvement strategies, whereas students in the control feedback condition (n = 41) received feedback without improvement strategies. Within each feedback condition, half of the students received a reflection assignment on feedback use and the revision (experimental reflection condition), while the other half received a reflection assignment on feedback perception (control reflection condition). Results indicated that in the experimental feedback condition writing performance gained from the control reflection assignment, while in the control feedback condition it gained from the experimental reflection assignment. Improvement strategies negatively predicted self-efficacy beliefs, especially when initial self-efficacy beliefs were low, and positively predicted planning/revising. Reflections on feedback use and the revision positively predicted mastery goal when mastery goal initially was low or moderate. 相似文献
13.
This study examines the impact of an assessment training module on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Seventy-eight undergraduate students participated in the study. The participants completed an assessment training exercise, prior to engaging in peer-assessment activities. During the training, students reviewed learning concepts, discussed marking criteria, graded example projects and compared their evaluations with the instructor’s evaluation. Data were collected in the form of initial and final versions of students’ projects, students’ scoring of example projects before and after the assessment training, and written feedback that students provided on peer projects. Results of data analysis indicate that the assessment training led to a significant decrease in the discrepancy between student ratings and instructor rating of example projects. In addition, the degree of student vs. instructor discrepancy was highly predictive of the quality of feedback that students provided to their peers and the effectiveness of revisions that they made to their own projects upon receiving peer feedback. Smaller discrepancies in ratings were associated with provision of higher quality peer feedback during peer assessment, as well as better revision of initial projects after peer assessment. 相似文献
14.
In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality. 相似文献
15.
Sarah Gielen Lies Tops Filip Dochy Patrick Onghena Stijn Smeets 《British Educational Research Journal》2010,36(1):143-162
This study examines whether peer feedback can be a substitute for teacher feedback and which measures can be taken to improve its effectiveness. A pre‐test post‐test control group design examined the long‐term learning effects of individual peer feedback and of collective teacher feedback on writing assignments in secondary education. Moreover, it examined the added value of a priori question forms and a posteriori reply forms aimed at supporting the assessee's response to peer feedback. The study supports the ‘non‐inferiority’ hypothesis of there being no significant difference in students’ progress after plain substitutional peer feedback or teacher feedback. Both groups (plain peer feedback and teacher feedback), however, improved significantly less than the groups that worked with question or reply forms, confirming the added‐value of these forms. Almost half of the students found the received peer feedback helpful, but less than a quarter considered giving feedback an aid in their own learning process. 相似文献
16.
Mengxiao Zhu Hee-Sun Lee Ting Wang Ou Lydia Liu Vinetha Belur Amy Pallant 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(12):1648-1668
ABSTRACTThis study investigates the role of automated scoring and feedback in supporting students’ construction of written scientific arguments while learning about factors that affect climate change in the classroom. The automated scoring and feedback technology was integrated into an online module. Students’ written scientific argumentation occurred when they responded to structured argumentation prompts. After submitting the open-ended responses, students received scores generated by a scoring engine and written feedback associated with the scores in real-time. Using the log data that recorded argumentation scores as well as argument submission and revisions activities, we answer three research questions. First, how students behaved after receiving the feedback; second, whether and how students’ revisions improved their argumentation scores; and third, did item difficulties shift with the availability of the automated feedback. Results showed that the majority of students (77%) made revisions after receiving the feedback, and students with higher initial scores were more likely to revise their responses. Students who revised had significantly higher final scores than those who did not, and each revision was associated with an average increase of 0.55 on the final scores. Analysis on item difficulty shifts showed that written scientific argumentation became easier after students used the automated feedback. 相似文献
17.
Yee Sean Deshler Jessica Rogers Kimberly Cervello Petrulis Robert Potvin Christopher D. Sweeney James 《Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education》2022,25(2):217-245
In this study, we sought to identify how feedback about classroom observations affected novice university mathematics instructors’ (UMIs) teaching practices. Specifically, we examined how a Red–Yellow–Green feedback system (RYG feedback) affected graduate student instructor (GSI) scores on an observation protocol (GSIOP). The protocol was developed specifically for this population, and both the GSIOP and RYG feedback were used within a peer mentoring program for GSIs, wherein novice GSIs were mentored by more experienced GSIs. Mentors observed novices’ classrooms using the GSIOP and provided RYG feedback as part of observation–feedback cycles. We analyzed 100 sets of scores, each collected over the course of a semester containing on average three observation–feedback cycles. Analyzing the semester-long datasets longitudinally provided insight into what types of feedback informed and influenced observed teaching. After qualitatively coding the feedback provided to the GSIs by their mentors along multiple dimensions, we found certain forms of feedback were more influential for observable changes in GSIs’ teaching. For example, pedagogical feedback that included contextualization (context and focal events) demonstrated a more positive change in GSIOP score than feedback that lacked contextualization. Our results suggest that contextual formative feedback has a positive change to student-focused and teacher-focused observations.
相似文献18.
With increasing need to achieve appropriate balance between learning support and self-regulation within the context of online learning, formative feedback has been identified as a viable means to achieve meaningful engagement. Specifically, this study sought to establish how peer–peer formative feedback was facilitated in an online course and to what extent this engaged students in meaningful learning experiences. This case study entailed an in-depth investigation into the design and implementation of an online course in a New Zealand university. The studied course was part of a postgraduate programme in continuing (in-service) teacher education. The study adopted a case study methodology with a bias on qualitative techniques. Online observations, analysis of the archived course discourse and interviews were utilised as sources of data. The data from multiple sources were subsequently triangulated to corroborate the evidence. The findings indicate that peer formative feedback promoted active learners’ participation and meaningful engagement. The findings further showed that opportunities for dialogic peer formative feedback promoted learning support and self-regulation. 相似文献
19.
Anne Deiglmayr 《European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE》2018,33(1):185-198
Formative peer assessment is an instructional method that offers many opportunities to foster students’ learning with respect to both the domain of the core task and students’ assessment skills. The contributions to this special issue effectively address earlier calls for more research into instructional scaffolds and the implementation of dialogic features in formative peer assessment. However, open issues remain regarding the role of assessment criteria, the benefit of formative peer assessment for transferable knowledge and skills, the role of metacognitive and cognitive processes in the provision and reception of peer feedback, and the proposed benefit of more interactive forms of formative peer assessment. Addressing the latter issue in particular, a framework of three dimensions of increasing interactivity is proposed in order to guide future research. These three dimensions comprise the learner’s engagement with the core task (low interactivity), the provision and reception of peer feedback (medium interactivity), and the learner’s engagement with argumentation, tutoring, and co-construction in dialogue with peers (high interactivity). 相似文献
20.
This research aims to promote our understanding of feedback engagement processes in writing tasks using a combination of online and offline measures, including eye-tracking, thinking-aloud, and text-analyses. Study 1 explored how sixteen students read, evaluate, and use feedback for revision. Results revealed three feedback processing strategies: (1) superficial processing (n = 6), which is characterized by reading feedback in a linear way, without critically rereading or revising the text, (2) local processing (n = 6) in which students switched between reading the comments and the commented text, and (3) deep processing (n = 4) in which students integrated the feedback with both commented and uncommented parts of the text and made more substantial revisions. In Study 2, we investigated the local and deep feedback reading strategy in more detail with 41 students using a within-subject design with different types of feedback. Results demonstrated the same strategies among students, but also that the focus of feedback affected students' revision behavior, above and beyond an individual feedback processing strategy. This finding is in line with previous research that emphasized the effects of feedback characteristics on students’ use of feedback. By triangulating various process measures, this research is one of the first that provides empirical evidence for different feedback processing strategies among students. These novel insights in individual feedback engagement processing can be used to extend and refine current theories on how, when, and why feedback works and for whom. 相似文献