Peer assessment as a collaborative learning activity: The role of interpersonal variables and conceptions

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 280-290

  van Gennip, Nanine A E ^a   Segers, Mien S R ^a   Tillema, Harm H ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Assessment for learning; Conceptions of peer assessment; Interpersonal variables; Peer assessment; Vocational education

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949873224     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.010     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Assessment Reform Group. The role of teachers in the assessment for learning (2006), London University Institute of Education, London
2. Atwater L.E., and Brett J.F. Antecedents and consequences of reactions to developmental 360° feedback. Journal of Vocational Behavior 66 (2005) 532-548
3. Ballantyne R., Hughes K., and Mylonas A. Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (2002) 427-441
4. Bandura A. Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory (1986), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
5. Black P.J., and Wiliam D. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education: principles. Policy and Practice 5 (1998) 7-74
6. Boud D. Enhancing learning through self-assessment (1995), Kogan Page, London
7. 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
8. Cho K., and MacArthur C. Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 328-338
9. Crawford J.L., and Gordon A.H. Predecisional information-seeking and subsequent conformity in the social influence process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23 (1972) 112-119
10. Crossman J. Factors influencing the assessment perceptions of training teachers. International Education Journal 5 (2004) 582-590
11. Davies P. Using student reflective self-assessment for awarding degree classifications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 39 (2002) 307-319
12. Dochy F.J.R.C., and McDowell L. Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation 23 (1997) 279-298
13. Dochy F., Segers M., and Sluijsmans D. The use of self-, peer-, and co-assessment in higher education: a review. Studies in Higher Education 24 (1999) 331-350
14. Edmondson A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (1999) 350-383
15. Falchikov N. Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International 32 (1995) 175-187
16. 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
17. 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
18. Hirschfeld G.H.F., and Brown G.T.L. Students' conceptions of assessment: factorial and structural invariance of the SCoA across sex, age, and ethnicity. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 25 (2009) 30-38
19. Jehn K.A., Northcraft G.B., and Neale M.A. Why differences make a difference: a field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (1999) 741-763
20. Johnson D.W. Communication in conflict situations: a critical review of the research. International Journal of Group Tensions 3 (1973) 46-67
21. Johnson D.W., and Johnson R.T. Cooperation and competition: Theory and research (1989), Interaction Book, Edina, MN
22. Kane M.B., and Mitchell R. Implementing performance assessment: Promises, problems, and challenges (1996), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
23. Kennedy K.J., Chan J.K.S., Fok P.K., and Yu W.M. Forms of assessment and their potential for enhancing learning: conceptual and cultural issues. Educational Research for Policy and Practice 7 (2008) 197-207
24. Marton F. Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science 10 (1981) 177-200
25. McDowell L. The impact of innovative assessment on student learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 32 (1995) 302-313
26. Mesch D., Marvin L., Johnson D.W., and Johnson R.T. Impact of positive interdependence and academic group contingencies on achievement. Journal of Social Psychology 128 (1988) 345-352
27. O'Connell D.Q., and Dickinson D.J. Student ratings of instruction as a function of testing conditions and perceptions of amount learned. Journal of Research and Development in Education 27 (1993) 18-23
28. Orsmond P., and Merry S. The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 21 (1996) 239-251
29. Pellegrino J.W., Chudowsky N., and Glaser R. Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment (2001), National Academic Press, Washington, DC
30. Pratt D.D. Conceptions of teaching. Adult Education Quarterly 42 (1992) 203-220
31. Ryan J., and Harrison P. The relationship between individual instructional characteristics and the overall assessment of teaching effectiveness across different instructional contexts. Research in Higher Education 36 (1995) 577-594
32. Searby M., and Ewers T. An evaluation of the use of peer assessment in higher education: a case study in the school of Music, Kingston University. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 22 (1997) 371-383
33. Shepard L.A. The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher 29 (2000) 4-14
34. Sluijsmans D. Establishing learning effects with integrated peer assessment tasks. Retrieved May 19, 2009, from (2002). http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/id437_establishing_learning_effects
35. 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 and Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (2002) 443-454
36. Stanier L. Peer assessment and group work as vehicles for student empowerment: a module evaluation. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 21 (1997) 95-98
37. Strijbos J.W., Narciss S., and Dünnebier K. Peer feedback content and sender's competence level in academic writing revision tasks: are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency?. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 291-303
38. Strijbos J.W., Ochoa T.A., Sluijsmans D.M.A., Segers M.S.R., and Tillema H.H. Fostering interactivity through formative peer assessment in (web-based) collaborative learning environments. In: Mourlas C., Tsianos N., and Germanakos P. (Eds). Cognitive and emotional processes in web-based education: Integrating human factors and personalization (2009), IGI Global, Hershey, PA 375-395
39. Thompson A.G. Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: a synthesis of the research. In: Grouws D.A. (Ed). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (1992), Macmillan, New York 127-146
40. Tillema H.H. Assessment for learning to teach: appraisal of practice teaching lessons by mentors, supervisors, and student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education 60 (2009) 155-167
41. Topping K. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 68 (1998) 249-276
42. Topping K.J. Self and peer assessment in school and university: reliability, validity and utility. In: Segers M., Dochy F., and Cascallar E. (Eds). Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (2003), Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 55-87
43. Topping K.J., Smith E.F., Swanson I., and Elliot A. Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 25 (2000) 146-169
44. Van den Bossche P., Gijselaers W., Segers M., and Kirschner P.A. Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: team learning beliefs and behaviors. Small Group Research 37 (2006) 490-521
45. Van der Vegt G., Emans B., and Van de Vliert E. Motivating effects of task and outcome interdependence in work teams. Group and Organization Management 23 (1998) 124-143
46. Van Gennip, N., Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., & Segers, M. (2004, June). Team learning: dealing with diversity. Paper presented at the 11th Educational Innovation in Business Education (EDiNEB) conference, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
47. 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) 41-54
48. 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
49. Van Zundert M., Sluijsmans D., and Van Merriënboer J. Effective peer assesment processes: research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction 20 4 (2010) 270-279
50. Wageman R. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (1995) 145-180
51. Winer B.J. Statistical principles of experimental design (1984), McGraw Hill, New York