Peer feedback or peer feedforward? Enhancing students’ argumentative peer learning processes and outcomes

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 2021, Pages 768-784

  Latifi, Saeed ^a   Noroozi, Omid ^b   Talaee, Ebrahim ^c  

^a KHARAZMI UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^b WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c TARBIAT MODARES UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

argumentative essay writing; domain specific learning; peer feedback; peer feedforward; peer learning

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; FEEDBACK; QUALITY CONTROL;

ARGUMENTATION STRATEGIES; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS; EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS; FACTORIAL EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS; INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY; INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT;

STUDENTS;

EID: 85099746694     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bjet.13054     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Bacha, N. (2010). Teaching the academic argument in a university EFL environment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(3), 229–241.
2. Bayerlein, L. (2014). Students’ feedback preferences: How do students react to timely and automatically generated assessment feedback? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 916–931.
3. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409–426.
4. Crowhurst, M. (1990). Teaching and learning the writing of persuasive/argumentative discourse. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue Canadienne De L'éducation, 15, 348–359.
5. Dijks, M. A., Brummer, L., & Kostons, D. (2018). The anonymous reviewer: The relationship between perceived expertise and the perceptions of peer feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1447645
6. Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00191.x
7. Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. In T. R. Guskey & R. J. Marzano (Eds.), Experts in assessment series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
8. Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015). Structuring the peer assessment process: A multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(5), 435–449.
9. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
10. Huisman, B., Saab, N., van den Broek, P., & van Driel, J. (2018). The impact of formative peer feedback on higher education students’ academic writing: A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1545896
11. Ion, G., Barrera-Corominas, A., & Tomàs-Folch, M. (2016). Written peer-feedback to enhance students’ current and future learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0017-y
12. Kellogg, R. T., & Whiteford, A. P. (2009). Training advanced writing skills: The case for deliberate practice. Educational Psychologist, 44(4), 250–266.
13. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into Practice, 41(1), 33–39.
14. Latifi, S., Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2019). How does online peer feedback improve argumentative essay writing and learning? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1687005
15. Leitão, S. (2003). Evaluating and selecting counterarguments: Studies of children’s rhetorical awareness. Written Communication, 20(3), 269–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303257507
16. Lin, G. Y. (2018). Anonymous versus identified peer assessment via a Facebook-based learning application: Effects on quality of peer feedback, perceived learning, perceived fairness, and attitude toward the system. Computers & Education, 116, 81–92.
17. Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer assessment: Feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00198.x
18. Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290.
19. Mei, W. S. (2006). Creating a contrastive rhetorical stance: Investigating the strategy of problematization in students’ argumentation. RELC Journal, 37(3), 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206071316
20. Min, H.-T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003
21. Min, H.-T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
22. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401.
23. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
24. Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102–122.
25. Nicolaidou, I. (2013). E-portfolios supporting primary students' writing performance and peer feedback. Computers & Education, 68, 404–415.
26. Noroozi, O. (2018). Considering students’ epistemic beliefs to facilitate their argumentative discourse and attitudinal change with a digital dialogue game. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(3), 357–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016.1208112
27. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Busstra, M. C., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2011). Differences in learning processes between successful and less successful students in computer-supported collaborative learning in the field of human nutrition and health. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2011), 309–318.
28. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2016). Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay. Internet and Higher Education, 31(1), 20–31.
29. Noroozi, O., & Hatami, J. (2019). The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(5), 548–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1431143
30. Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2018). Students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing, and content learning: Does gender matter? Interactive Learning Environments, 28(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200
31. Noroozi, O., Kirschner, P. A., Biemans, H. J., & Mulder, M. (2018). Promoting argumentation competence: Extending from first-to second-order scaffolding through adaptive fading. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 153–176.
32. Noroozi, O., & Mulder, M. (2017). Design and evaluation of a digital module with guided peer feedback for student learning biotechnology and molecular life sciences, attitudinal change, and satisfaction. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 45(1), 31–39.
33. 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(4), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.005.
34. Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43(5), 591–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x
35. Rahimi, M. (2013). Is training student reviewers worth its while? A study of how training influences the quality of students’ feedback and writing. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812459151
36. Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003
37. Schneer, D. (2014). Rethinking the argumentative essay. TESOL Journal, 5(4), 619–653.
38. Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2012). Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Instructional Science, 40(2), 297–323.
39. Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 421–447.
40. Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172
41. Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 20–27.
42. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43. Tsui, A. B., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170.
44. Valero Haro, A., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2018). The effects of an online learning environment with worked examples and peer feedback on students’ argumentative essay writing and domain-specific knowledge acquisition in the field of biotechnology. Journal of Biological Education, 53(4), 390–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1472132
45. Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007). Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 532–548.
46. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
48. Wingate, U. (2012). ‘Argument!’ helping students understand what essay writing is about. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2012), 145–154.
49. Wood, N. V. (2001). Perspectives on argument. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
50. Wu, S. M. (2006). Creating a contrastive rhetorical stance: Investigating the strategy of problematization in students' argumentation. RELC Journal, 37(3), 329–353.
51. Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students’ performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 186–193.
52. Yang, Y. F. (2010). Students’ reflection on online self-correction and peer review to improve writing. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1202–1210.