Providing Formative Peer Feedback: What Do We Know?

The Cambridge Handbook of Instructional Feedback

Volumn , Issue , 2018, Pages 409-431

  Panadero, Ernesto ^a   Jonsson, Anders ^b   Alqassab, Maryam ^c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b KRISTIANSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85138950899     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.020     Document Type: Chapter

References (69)

1. Alqassab, M. (2016). Peer feedback provision and mathematical proofs: Role of domain knowledge, beliefs, perceptions, epistemic emotions, and peer feedback content. Doctoral thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians University.
2. Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7-73.
3. Brown, G. T. L., and Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. McMillan (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367-393). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
4. Chesney, S., and Marcangelo, C. (2010). “There was a lot of learning going on”: Using a digital medium to support learning in a professional course for new HE lecturers. Computers and Education, 54, 701-708.
5. Cho, K., Cho, M., and Hacker, D. J. (2010). Self-monitoring support for learning to write. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(2), 101-113.
6. Cho, K., Chung, T. R., King, W. R., and Schunn, C. D. (2008). Peer-based computersupported knowledge refinement: An empirical investigation. Communications of the ACM, 51(3), 83-88.
7. Cho, K., and MacArthur, C. A. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338.
8. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., and Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing. Written Communication, 23, 260-294.
9. Dochy, F., Segers, M., and Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer- and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24, 331-350.
10. Falchikov, N. (2007). The place of peers in learning and assessment. In D. Boud and N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment for higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 128-143). London: Routledge.
11. Falchikov, N., and Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 59, 395-430.
12. Falchikov, N., and Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70, 287-322.
13. Gan, J. S. M. (2011). The effects of prompts and explicit coaching on peer feedback quality. Doctoral thesis, University of Auckland.
14. Gan, M. J. S., and Hattie, J. (2014). Prompting secondary students’ use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels during an investigative task. Instructional Science, 42, 861-878.
15. Gan, M. J. S., and Hill, M. (2014). Using a dialogical approach to examine peer feedback during chemistry investigative task discussion. Research in Science Education, 44, 727-749.
16. Ge, X., and Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51, 21-38.
17. Gielen, M. (2016). The impact of structuring peer feedback in a wiki-based CSCL environment on performance and feedback content. Dissertation, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University.
18. Gielen, M., and 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.
19. Gielen, M., and De Wever, B. (2015a). Structuring the peer assessment process: A multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31, 435-449.
20. Gielen, M., and De Wever, B. (2015b). Structuring peer assessment: Comparing the impact of the degree of structure on peer feedback content. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 315-325.
21. Gielen, M., and De Wever, B. (2015c). Scripting the role of assessor and assessee in peer assessment in a wiki environment: Impact on peer feedback quality and product improvement. Computers and Education, 88, 370-386.
22. Gielen, S. (2007). Peer assessment as a tool for learning. Doctoral thesis, University of Leuven.
23. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., and Dierick, S. (2003). Evaluating the consequential validity of new modes of assessment: The influence of assessment on learning, including pre-, post-, and true assessment effects. In M. Segers, F. Dochy, and E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 37-54). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
24. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., and Onghena, P. (2011). An inventory of peer assessment diversity. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 137-155.
25. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Janssens, S., Schelfhout, W., and Decuyper, S. (2007). A complementary role for peer feedback and staff feedback in powerful learning environments. Manuscript submitted for publication.
26. Gielen, S., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Struyven, K., and Smeets, S. (2011). Goals of peer assessment and their associated quality concepts. Studies in Higher Education, 36, 719-735.
27. Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., and Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 304-315.
28. Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., and Smeets, S. (2010). Peer feedback as a substitute for teacher feedback. Manuscript submitted for publication.
29. Gikandi, J. W., and Morrow, D. (2016). Designing and implementing peer formative feedback within online learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25, 153-170.
30. Hattie, J., and Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer and P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249-271). New York: Routledge.
31. Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
32. Kluger, A. N., and 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.
33. Li, L., Liu, X., and 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.
34. Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., and Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In G. T. L. Brown and L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169-185). New York: Routledge.
35. Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., and Yuan, S. M. (2002). Student attitudes toward networked peer assessment: Case studies of undergraduate students and senior high school students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29, 241-254.
36. Liu, N. F., and Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11, 279-290.
37. McCarthy, J. M. (2016). Global learning partnerships in the café: Peer feedback as a formative assessment tool for animation students. Interactive Learning Environments, 24, 1298-1318.
38. Messick, S. (1998). Test validity: A matter of consequence. Social Indicators Research, 45, 35-44.
39. Narciss, S., and Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. In H. M. Niegemann, R. Brünken, and D. Leutner (Eds.), Instructional design for multimedia learning. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop of SIG 6 Instructional Design of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) (pp. 181-195). Münster: Waxmann.
40. Panadero, E. (2016). Is it safe? Social, interpersonal, and human effects of peer assessment: A review and future directions. In G. T. L. Brown and L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 247-266). New York: Routledge.
41. Panadero, E., and Brown, G. T. L. (2017). Teachers’ reasons for using peer assessment: Positive experience predicts use. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32, 133-156.
42. Panadero, E., Brown, G. T. L., and Strijbos, J. W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 803-830.
43. Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., and Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on selfregulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74-98.
44. Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., and Strijbos, J. W. (2016). Scaffolding self-regulated learning through self-assessment and peer assessment: Guidelines for classroom implementation. In D. Laveault and L. Allal (Eds.), Assessment for learning: Meeting the challenge of implementation (pp. 311-326). New York: Springer.
45. Panadero, E., Romero, M., and Strijbos, J. W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on construct validity of peer assessment, perceived fairness and comfort, and performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 195-203.
46. Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C. A., and Schunn, C. D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41, 381-405.
47. Patchan, M. M., and Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43, 591-614.
48. Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 265-289.
49. Rotsaert, T. (2017). The social nature of peer assessment in secondary and higher education: Examining students’ perceptions on interpersonal processes and peer feedback quality in anonymous face-to-face settings using mobile response technology. Doctoral thesis, Ghent University.
50. Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., Estrada, E., and Schellens, T. (2017). How do students perceive the educational value of peer assessment in relation to its social nature? A survey study in Flanders. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 29-40.
51. Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., Schellens, T., and Raes, A. (2018a). “Now you know what you’re doing right and wrong!" Peer feedback quality in synchronous peer assessment in secondary education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(2), 255-275. doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0329-x
52. Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., and Schellens, T. (2018b). Peer assessment use, its social nature challenges and perceived educational value: a teachers’ survey study. Accepted for publication in Studies in Educational Evaluation.
53. Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., and Schellens, T. (2018c). Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: Its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33, 75-99. doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0339-8
54. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153-189.
55. Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., and van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 443-454.
56. Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., and Martens, R. L. (2004). Training teachers in peer-assessment skills: Effects on performance and perceptions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41, 59-78.
57. Strijbos, J. W., and Müller, A. (2014). Personale faktoren im feedbackprozess. In H. Ditton and A. Müller (Eds.), Feedback und rückmeldungen: Theoretische grundlagen, empirische befunde, praktische anwendungsfelder [Feedback and evaluation: Theoretical foundations, empirical findings, practical implementation] (pp. 87-134). Münster: Waxmann.
58. Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., and 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.
59. Strijbos, J. W., Ochoa, T. A., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Segers, M., and Tillema, H. H. (2009). Fostering interactivity through formative peer assessment in (web-based) collaborative learning environments. In C. Mourlas, N. Tsianos, and P. Germanakos (Eds.), Cognitive and emotional processes in web-based education: Integrating human factors and personalization (pp. 375-395). Hersey, PA: IGI Global.
60. Strijbos, J. W., and Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 265-269.
61. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
62. van Gennip, N. (2012). Assessing together: Peer assessment from an interpersonal perspective. Doctoral thesis, Universiteit Leiden.
63. van Gennip, N., Segers, M., and Tillema, H. H. (2009). Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: The influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review, 4, 41-54.
64. van Gennip, N., Segers, M., and Tillema, H. H. (2010). Peer assessment as a collaborative learning activity: The role of interpersonal variables and conceptions. Learning and Instruction, 20, 280-290.
65. van Zundert, M. (2012). Conditions of peer assessment for complex learning. Doctoral thesis, Maastrich University.
66. van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Könings, K. D., and van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2012). The differential effects of task complexity on domain-specific and peer assessment skills. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 32, 127-145.
67. van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., and van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20, 270-279.
68. Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37, 3-14.
69. Yan, Z., and Brown, G. T. L. (2016). A cyclical self-assessment process: Towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-16.