Making judgements: investigating the process of composing and receiving peer feedback

Studies in Higher Education

Volumn 40, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1495-1506

  McConlogue, Teresa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

assessment; dialogue; feedback on student writing; peer assessment; peer feedback

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941740762     PISSN: 03075079     EISSN: 1470174X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2013.868878     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. C.Adelman,, D.Jenkins, and S.Kemmis. 1980. Rethinking case study: Notes from the second cambridge conference. In Towards a science of the singular, ed. H.Simons, 47–61. University of East Anglia, Centre for Applied Research in Education, Occasional Publication, No. 10.
2. S.Bloxham,, and A.West. 2007. Learning to write in higher education: Students’ perceptions of an intervention in developing understanding of assessment criteria. Teaching in Higher Education 12, no.1: 77–89. doi: 10.1080/13562510601102180
3. D.Carless,. 2006. Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 2: 219–33. doi: 10.1080/03075070600572132
4. P.Cartney, 2010. Exploring the use of peer assessment as a vehicle for closing the gap between feedback given and feedback used. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, no. 5: 551–64. doi: 10.1080/02602931003632381
5. K.Cho,, and C.D.Schunn. 2007. Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers and Education 48: 409–26. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.004
6. J.Cowan,. 2010. Developing the ability for making evaluative judgements. Teaching in Higher Education 15, no. 3: 323–34. doi: 10.1080/13562510903560036
7. N.K.Denzin, 1989. Interpretative interactionism. Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage.
8. D.A.Erlandson,, E.L.Harris,, B.L.Skipper,, S.D.Allen, 1993. Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9. N.Falchikov,. 2003. Involving students in assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching 32, no. 2: 102–8. doi: 10.2304/plat.2003.3.2.102
10. S.Gielen,, E.Peeters, F.Dochy, P.Onghena, and K.Struyven. 2010. Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction 20, no. 4: 304–15. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
11. J.Giltrow,, and M.Valiquette,. 1994. Genres and knowledge: Students writing in the disciplines. In Teaching and Learning Genre, ed. A.Freedman and P.Medway, 47–62. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
12. D.Hamilton, 1980. Some contrasting assumptions about case study research and survey analysis. In Towards a science of the singular, ed. H.Simons, 78–92. University of East Anglia, Centre for Applied Research in Education, Occasional Publication No. 10.
13. HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England). 2010. National student survey findings and trends 2006 to 2009, Issues Paper. London: HEFCE. Available at http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce1/pubs/hefce/2010/1018/10_18.pdf (accessed January 13, 2014).
14. M.Kim,. 2009. The impact of an elaborated assessee's role in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34, no. 1: 105–14. doi: 10.1080/02602930801955960
15. S.Kvale,. 1996. Interviews—an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. M.R.Lea,, and B.V.Street. 1998. Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education 23, no. 2: 157–72. doi: 10.1080/03075079812331380364
17. T.Lillis,. 2003. Student writing as ‘academic literacies’: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from critique to design. Language and Education 17, no. 3: 192–207. doi: 10.1080/09500780308666848
18. Y.S.Lincoln,, and E.G.Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
19. Y.S.Lincoln,, and E.G.Guba. 2000. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging influences. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research, ed. N.K.Denzin and Y.S.Lincoln, 163–88. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage.
20. N.F.Liu,, and D.Carless. 2006. Peer feedback the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education 11, no. 3: 279–90. doi: 10.1080/13562510600680582
21. T.McConlogue,. 2012. But is it fair? Developing students’ understanding of grading complex written work through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, no. 5: 113–23. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2010.515010
22. D.McConnell,. 2002. The experience of collaborative assessment in e-learning. Studies in Continuing Education 24, no. 1: 73–92. doi: 10.1080/01580370220130459
23. D.Nicol,. 2010. From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35, no. 5: 501–17. doi: 10.1080/02602931003786559
24. D.Nicol, 2011. Developing students’ ability to construct feedback. Presented at 8th Annual Enhancement Themes Conference, March 2–3, Heriot Watt University. Available at http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/resources/publications/graduates-for-the-21st-century (accessed January 13, 2014).
25. A.Northedge,. 2003. Rethinking teaching in the context of diversity. Teaching in Higher Education, 8, no. 1: 17–32. doi: 10.1080/1356251032000052302
26. M.M.Patchan,, D.Charney, and C.D.Schunn. 2009. A validation study of students’ end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor. Journal of Writing Research 1, no. 2: 124–52. doi: 10.17239/jowr-2009.01.02.2
27. M.Polanyi, Michael. 1964 [1958]. Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
28. M.Price,, K.Handley, J.Millar, and B.O'Donovan. 2010. Feedback: All that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35, no. 3: 277–89. doi: 10.1080/02602930903541007
29. M.Price,, C.Rust, B.O'Donovan, K.Handley, and R.Bryant. 2013. Assessment literacy: The foundation for improving student learning. Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
30. D.R.Sadler, 2009. Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34, no. 2: 159–79. doi: 10.1080/02602930801956059
31. D.R.Sadler, 2010. Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35, no. 5: 535–50. doi: 10.1080/02602930903541015
32. D.R.Sadler, 2014. Learning from assessment events: The role of goal knowledge. In Advances and innovations in university assessment and feedback: A festschrift in honour of Professor Dai Hounsell, ed. C.Kreber, C.Anderson, N.Entwistle, and J.McArthur. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
33. R.E.Stake, 1995. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. H.Simons,. 1996. The paradox of case study. Cambridge Journal of Education 26, no. 2: 225–40. doi: 10.1080/0305764960260206
35. T.T.Vu,, and G.Dall'Alba,. 2007. Students’ experience of peer assessment in a professional course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 32, no. 5: 541–56. doi: 10.1080/02602930601116896
36. L.S.Vygotsky, 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. M.L.Wen,, and C.-C.Tsai. 2008. Online peer assessment in an inservice science and mathematics teacher education course. Teaching in Higher Education 13, no. 1, 55–67. doi: 10.1080/13562510701794050
38. R.K.Yin, 2009. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. M.Yorke,. 2003. Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45: 477–501. doi: 10.1023/A:1023967026413