Peer feedback content and sender's competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency?

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 291-303

  Strijbos, Jan Willem ^a   Narciss, Susanne ^b   Dünnebier, Katrin ^c  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Feedback content; Feedback perceptions; Peer assessment; Peer feedback; Text revision

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949873085     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Andrews M.C., and Kacmar K.M. Confirmation and extension of the sources of feedback scale in service-based organizations. The Journal of Business Communications 38 (2001) 206-226
2. Arndt V. Response to writing: using feedback to inform the writing process. In: Brock M.N., and Walters L. (Eds). Teaching composition around the Pacific rim: Politics and pedagogy (1993), Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, UK 90-116
3. Assessment Reform Group. Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Retrieved 21 May, 2009, from (2002). http://www.assessment-reform-group.org/CIE3.PDF
4. Birnbaum M.H., and Stegner S.E. Source credibility in social judgments: bias, expertise, and the judges's point of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (1979) 48-74
5. Black P., and Wiliam D. Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment (1998), King's College, School of Education, London
6. Brown G.T.L., Irving S.E., Peterson E.R., and Hirschfeld G.H.F. Use of interactive-informal assessment practices: New Zealand secondary students' conceptions of assessment. Learning and Instruction 19 (2009) 97-111
7. Cho K., and MacArthur C. Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 328-338
8. Cusella L.P. The effects of source expertise and feedback valence on intrinsic motivation. Human Communication Research 9 (1982) 17-32
9. Falchikov N., and Goldfinch J. Student peer assessment in higher education: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research 70 (2000) 287-322
10. Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 2nd ed. (2005), Sage, London
11. Gielen S., Peeters E., Dochy F., Onghena P., and Struyven K. Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 304-315
12. Giffin K. The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin 68 (1967) 104-120
13. Greller M.M., and Herold D.M. Sources of feedback: a preliminary investigation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 13 (1975) 244-256
14. Halperin K., Snyder C.R., Shenkel R.J., and Houston B.K. Effect of source status and message favorability on acceptance of personality feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology 61 (1976) 85-88
15. Hanrahan J., and Isaacs G. Asssessing self- and peer assessment: the students' views. Higher Education Research and Development 20 (2001) 53-70
16. Hattie J., and Timperley H. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77 (2007) 81-112
17. Ilgen D.R., Fisher C.D., and Taylor M.S. Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology 64 (1979) 349-371
18. Jacobs G.M., Curtis A., Braine G., and Huang S.-Y. Feedback on student writing: taking the middle path. Journal of Second Language Writing 7 (1998) 307-317
19. Kali Y., and Ronen M. Assessing the assessors: added value in web-based multi-cycle peer assessment in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 3 (2008) 3-32
20. Klein S.M., Kraut A.I., and Wolfson A. Employee reactions to attitude survey feedback: a study of the impact of structure and process. Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (1971) 497-514
21. Kluger A.N., and DeNisi A. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 119 (1996) 254-284
22. Kwok L. Students' perception of peer evaluation and teachers' role in seminar discussions. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5 (2008) 89-97
23. Langer I., Schulz von Thun F., and Tausch R. Sich verständlich ausdrucken (Expressing oneself comprehensively) (1999), Ernst Reinhardt Verlag, München, Germany
24. Lee I. Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing 17 (2008) 144-164
25. Leki I. The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level-writing classes. Foreign Language Annals 24 (1991) 203-218
26. Leung K., Su S., and Morris M.W. When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations 54 (2001) 1155-1187
27. Lin S.S.J., Liu E.Z.F., and Yuan S.M. Web-based peer assessment: feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 17 (2001) 420-432
28. Lindblom-Ylänne S., Pihlajamäki H., and Kotkas T. Self-, peer- and teacher-assessment of student essays. Active Learning in Higher Education 7 (2006) 51-62
29. Lockhart C., and Ng P. How useful is peer response?. Perspectives 5 (1993) 17-29
30. Lockhart C., and Ng P. Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: stances, functions, and content. Language Learning 45 (1995) 605-655
31. Miedema, J. L. (2004). Fairness and the self. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands (Kurt Lewin Institute Dissertation Series, 2003-9).
32. Mory E.H. Feedback research revisited. In: Jonassen D.H. (Ed). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. 2nd ed. (2004), Erlbaum, New York 745-783
33. Musil C.M., Warner C.B., Yobas P.K., and Jones S.L. A comparison of imputation techniques for handling missing data. Western Journal of Nursing Research 24 (2002) 815-829
34. Narciss S. Informatives tutorielles feedback (Informative tutorial feedback) (2006), Waxmann, Münster, Germany
35. Narciss S. Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In: Spector J.M., Merrill M.D., Van Merriënboer J.J.G., and Driscoll M.P. (Eds). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. 3rd ed. (2008), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 125-143
36. Narciss S., and Huth K. How to design informative tutoring feedback for multi-media learning. In: Niegemann H.M., Leutner D., and Brünken R. (Eds). Instructional design for multimedia learning (2004), Waxmann, Münster, Germany 181-195
37. Pezdek K. Wiederentdeckte Erinnerungen oder falsche Erinnerungen? (Rediscovered memories or false memories). (J. Grabowski & E. Van der Meer, Trans.). In: Atkinson R.L., Atkinson R.C., Smith E.E., Bern D.J., and Nolen-Hoeksema S. (Eds). Hilgards Einführung in die Psychologie (2001), Spektrum, Heidelberg, Germany 297
38. Poulos A., and Mahony M.J. Effectiveness of feedback: the students' perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33 (2008) 143-154
39. Prins F.J., Sluijsmans D.M.A., and Kirschner P.A. Feedback for general practitioners in training: quality, styles, and preferences. Advances in Health Sciences Education 11 (2006) 289-303
40. Proske, A. (2006). Entwicklung und Evaluation computerbasierter Trainingsaufgaben für das wissenschaftlichen schreiben [Design and evaluation of computer-based training assignments for academic writing]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
41. Robinson M.D., and Clore G.L. Simulation, scenarios, and emotional appraisal: testing the convergence of real and imagined reactions to emotional stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 (2001) 1520-1532
42. Shute V.J. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 78 (2008) 153-189
43. Slobin D.I. Wie die Sprache das Denken lenken kann: linguïstische Relativität und linguistischer Determinismus (How speech directs thought: linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism). (J. Grabowski & E. Van der Meer, Trans.). In: Atkinson R.L., Atkinson R.C., Smith E.E., Bern D.J., and Nolen-Hoeksema S. (Eds). Hilgards Einführung in die Psychologie (2001), Spektrum, Heidelberg, Germany 336
44. Sluijsmans D., Dochy F., and Moerkerke G. Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research 1 (1999) 293-319
45. Sluijsmans D.M.A., Brand-Gruwel S., and Van Merriënboer J.J.G. Peer assessment training in teacher education: effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (2002) 443-454
46. Straub R. Students' reactions to teacher comments: an exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English 31 (1997) 91-119
47. Tabachnick B.G., and Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. (2001), Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA
48. Topping K. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 68 (1998) 249-276
49. Tsui A.B.M., and Ng M. Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?. Journal of Second Language Learning 9 (2000) 147-170
50. Van den Berg, I. (2003). Peer assessment in universitair onderwijs: Een onderzoek naar bruikbare ontwerpen [Peer assessment in higher education: A study on useful designs]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
51. Van Gennip N.A.E., Segers M.S.R., and Tillema H.H. Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: the influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review 4 (2009) 41-51
52. Van Gennip N.A.E., Segers M.S.R., and Tillema H.H. Peer assessment as a collaborative learning activity: the role of interpersonal variables and conceptions. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 280-290
53. Van Gog T., Paas F., Savenye W., Robinson R., Niemczyk M., Atkinson R., et al. Data collection and analysis (section on assessment of complex performance). In: Spector J.M., Merrill M.D., Van Merriënboer J.J.G., and Driscoll M.P. (Eds). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. 3rd ed. (2008), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 763-800
54. Van Steendam E., Rijlaarsdam G., Sercu L., and Van den Bergh H. The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 316-327
55. Van Zundert M., Sluijsmans D., and Van Merriënboer J. Effective peer assessment processes: research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 270-279
56. Walker A. British psychology students' perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching 1 (2001) 28-36
57. Yang M., Badger R., and Yu Z. A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing 15 (2006) 179-200
58. Zhang S. Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (1995) 209-222