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

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 435-449

  Gielen, Mario ^a   De Wever, B ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Higher education; Peer assessment; Peer feedback quality; Structuring

Indexed keywords

EID: 84936778772     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jcal.12096     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 12-19.
2. Birenbaum, M. (1996). Assessment 2000: Towards a pluralistic approach to assessment. In M. Birenbaum & F. Dochy (Eds.), Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge (pp. 3-29). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
3. Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5, 7-74.
4. Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22, 151-167.
5. Chen, Y. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). An educational research course facilitated by online peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46, 105-117.
6. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338.
7. De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2011). Assessing collaboration in a wiki: The reliability of university students' peer assessment. The Internet and Higher Education, 14, 201-206.
8. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61-91). Heerlen: Open University of the Netherlands.
9. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research in computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, and S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3-19). Netherlands: Springer.
10. Duijnhouwer, H., Prins, F. J., & Stokking, K. M. (2012). Feedback providing improvement strategies and reflection on feedback use: Effects on students' writing motivation, process, and performance. Learning and Instruction, 22, 171-184.
11. Dysthe, O. (2004). The challenges of assessment in a new learning culture. The 32nd International NERA/NFPF Conference, Reykjavik, Iceland.
12. Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, 83, 70-120.
13. Falchikov, N. (1995). Improving feedback to and from students. In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 157-166). London: Kogan Page.
14. Falchikov, N. (2003). Involving students in assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 3, 102-108.
15. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48, 56-66.
16. Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2012). Peer assessment in a wiki: Product improvement, students' learning and perception regarding peer feedback. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 585-594.
17. Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2013). Structuring the peer assessment process: Impact on feedback quality. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, N. Mitchell, and S. Puntambekar (Eds.), To see the world and a grain of sand: Learning across levels of space, time, and scale: CSCL 2013 conference proceedings volume 2 - short papers, panels, posters, demos, & community events (pp. 255-256). Wisconsin, MA: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.isls.org/cscl2013/Volume%202%20Final%20CSCL%202013%20Proceedings.pdf; October 1, 2014.
18. Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 304-315.
19. Hafner, J., & Hafner, P. (2003). Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: An empirical study of student peer-group rating. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1509-1528.
20. Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249-271). New York: Routledge and Taylor & Francis Group.
21. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
22. Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133-152.
23. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into Practice, 41, 33-39.
24. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
25. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.
26. Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hamalainen, R., Hakkinen, P., & Fischer, F. (2007). Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 211-224.
27. Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20, 344-348.
28. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts - a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 159-185.
29. Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 525-536.
30. Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. Van Merriënboer, and M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 125-143). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37, 375-401.
32. Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2004). Rethinking formative assessment in HE: A theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice.
33. Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199-218.
34. Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 102-122.
35. O'Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. O'Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120-141). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
37. Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129-144.
38. Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 195-203.
39. Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V., & Wray, D. (2012). Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: A multiple case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 465-477.
40. Prins, F., Sluijsmans, D., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006). Feedback for general practitioners in training: Quality, styles, and preferences. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11, 289-303.
41. Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 535-550.
42. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46, 349-370.
43. Sluijsmans, D. (2002). Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
44. Sluijsmans, D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 443-454.
45. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
46. Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). 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, 291-303.
47. Strijbos, J. W., & Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20, 265-269.
48. Strijbos, J. W., Van Goozen, B., & Prins, F. (2012). Developing a coding scheme for analysing peer feedback messages. Paper presented at the meeting of EARLI-SIG 1 Assessment and Evaluation Conference, Brussels, Belgium.
49. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
50. Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 20-27.
51. Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161-1174.
52. Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5-13.
53. Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Van den Berg, H. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20, 316-327.