Peer review in the classroom: student perceptions,peer feedback quality and the role of assessment

Abstract

Peer review in the classroom can enhance numerous employability skills such as critical appraisal, writing skills, reflection practices and collaborative experiences. This study takes place over two years and discusses the implementation of a repeating blind peer review cycle across a single semester for final year chemistry students enrolled on a compulsory employability module. The feedback cycle promotes personal reflection through the use of mini-reflective questionnaires. The process was assessed by academic tutors at the resubmission stage and/or the peer feedback stage where the quality of peer feedback was directly assessed. The research investigates the quality of peer feedback, the importance of assessment and student perceptions of what is most useful. Methods include directed content analysis of feedback produced, student opinions and a focus group. Students were capable of offering useable feedback across a range of assessment criteria but tend to focus on the important criteria best aligned to the particular assignment. A range of motivational factors and tactics were noticed but students tended to find reviewing the most beneficial.     

The development of academics’ feedback literacy: experiences of learning from critical feedback via scholarly peer review

Abstract

The emerging literature related to feedback literacy has hitherto focused primarily on students’ engagement with feedback, and yet an analysis of academics’ feedback literacy is also of interest to those seeking to understand effective strategies to engage with feedback. Data from concept map-mediated interviews and reflections, with a team of six colleagues, surface academics’ responses to receiving critical feedback via scholarly peer review. Our findings reveal that feedback can be visceral and affecting, but that academics employ a number of strategies to engage with this process. This process can lead to actions that are both instrumental, enabling academics to more effectively ‘play the game’ of publication, as well as to learning that is more positively and holistically developmental. This study thus aims to open up a dialogue with colleagues internationally about the role of feedback literacy, for both academics and students. By openly sharing our own experiences we seek to normalise the difficulties academics routinely experience whilst engaging with critical feedback, to share the learning and strategies which can result from peer review feedback, and to explore how academics may occupy a comparable role to students who also receive evaluation of their work.     

The assessment cycle: a model for learning through peer assessment

This paper advances a model describing how peer assessment supports self-assessment. Although prior research demonstrates that peer assessment promotes self-assessment, the connection between these two activities is underspecified. This model, the assessment cycle, draws from theories of self-assessment to elaborate how learning takes place through peer assessment. The model is applied to three activity structures described in the literature to analyse their potential to support learning by promoting self-assessment. Broadly speaking, the model can be used to understand learning that takes place in a variety of peer assessment activities: marking/grading, analysis, feedback, conferencing and revision. This approach contrasts most studies on peer assessment, which have focused on calibration of instructor and peer grades, rather than learning opportunities.     

The role of anonymity in peer assessment

This quasi-experimental study aimed to examine the impact of anonymity and training (an alternative strategy when anonymity was unattainable) on students’ performance and perceptions in formative peer assessment. The training in this study focused on educating students to understand and appreciate formative peer assessment. A sample of 77 students participated in a peer assessment activity in three conditions: a group with participants’ identities revealed (Identity Group), a group with anonymity provided (Anonymity Group) and a group with identities revealed but training provided (Training Group). Data analysis indicated that both the Anonymity Group and Training Group outperformed the Identity Group on projects. In terms of perceptions, however, the Training Group appreciated the value of peer assessment more and experienced less pressure in the process than the other two groups.     

A GEARed peer feedback model and implications for learning facilitation

This study proposes a model to view and analyse college students’ written peer feedback after they assess each other’s formative task assignment and provide comments. The model was developed by: (a) revisiting learning-oriented assessment and feedback theories, (b) reviewing and summarising existing peer feedback analysis approaches as detailed in published empirical studies, and (c) analysing a small set of primary learner peer feedback data. In the proposed GEARed model of peer feedback, each complete piece of comment on one improvable unit may have four cognitive elements, i.e. identification of the Gap between performance and goal, Explanation of the gap, gap-bridging Aspirations, and being Resourceful to reach beyond the current knowledge/skill level. Two social-affective-interactive elements also play a part, i.e. being encouraging to the peer feedback receiver and doubtful toward the provider self. Each feedback comment may contain any or all of these incremental elements rather than being assigned only to one category. It is argued that the absent or unresolved aspects in feedback leave room for the receiver to reflect and may suggest instructional actions for teachers. Finally, different patterns of GEARed component combinations are hypothesised and their implications for learning and teaching are discussed.     

The alignment of written peer feedback with draft problems and its impact on revision in peer assessment

Despite the wide use of peer assessment, questions about the helpfulness of peer feedback are frequently raised. In particular, it is unknown whether, how and to what extent peer feedback can help solve problems in initial texts in complex writing tasks. We investigated this research gap by focusing on the case of writing literature reviews in an academic writing course. The dataset includes two drafts from 21 students, sampled to represent a wide range of document qualities, and 84 anonymous peer reviews, involving 1,289 idea units. Our study revealed that: (1) at both substance and high prose levels, drafts of all quality levels demonstrated more common problems on advanced writing issues (e.g. counter-argument); (2) peer feedback was driven by difficulty of the problem rather than overall draft quality, peer comments were not well aligned with the relative frequency of problems, more comments were given to less difficult problems; (3) peer feedback had a moderate impact on revision, and importantly, receiving multiple comments on the same issue led to more repairs and improvement of draft quality, but consistent with the comments received, authors tended to fix basic problems more often. Implications for practice and research are drawn from these findings.     

Using and rejecting peer feedback in the science classroom: a study of students’ negotiations on how to use peer feedback when designing experiments

Background: Research on peer assessment has noted ambiguity among students in using peer assessment for improving their work. Previous research has explained this in terms of deficits in the student feedback, or differences in student views of what counts as high-quality work.

Purpose: This study frames peer assessment as a social process in the science classroom. The aim is to explore peer assessment in science education as social practice in order to contribute to an understanding of the affordances and constraints of using peer assessment as a learning tool in science education.

Design and Method: The study was conducted in four lower secondary school classes, school years 8 and 9, in two different schools. An intervention study was designed focussing on the topic of experimental design. It involved the students in a process of peer assessment where they designed experiments individually, and then exchanged their designs, conducted each other’s experiments, provided feedback to each other and revised their original design after discussing the feedback in groups. Data were collected in the form of audio recordings of student discussions and written work.

Results: The results show that, although not all peer feedback resulted in revisions, peer feedback was useful to the students in group interaction when negotiating quality in their work.

Conclusions: To conclude, the potential for using peer assessment in science education should not only be evaluated through the students’ revisions but also in terms of in what ways the feedback constitutes interactional resources for defining quality in student work.     

Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective

Peer review is a reciprocal process whereby students produce feedback reviews on the work of peers and receive feedback reviews from peers on their own work. Prior research has primarily examined the learning benefits that result from the receipt of feedback reviews, with few studies specifically exploring the merits of producing feedback reviews or the learning mechanisms that this activates. Using accounts of their experiences of peer review, this study illuminates students’ perceptions of the different learning benefits resulting from feedback receipt and feedback production, and, importantly, it provides insight into the cognitive processes that are activated when students construct feedback reviews. The findings show that producing feedback reviews engages students in multiple acts of evaluative judgement, both about the work of peers, and, through a reflective process, about their own work; that it involves them in both invoking and applying criteria to explain those judgements; and that it shifts control of feedback processes into students’ hands, a shift that can reduce their need for external feedback. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. It is argued that the capacity to produce quality feedback is a fundamental graduate skill, and, as such, it should receive much greater attention in higher education curricula.     

Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback

This study reports the effects of online peer assessment, in the form of peer grading and peer feedback, on students’ learning. One hundred and eighty one high school students engaged in peer assessment via an online system—iLap. The number of grade-giving and grade-receiving experiences was examined and the peer feedback was coded according to different cognitive and affective dimensions. The effects, on both assessors and assessees, were analyzed using multiple regression. The results indicate that the provision by student assessors of feedback that identified problems and gave suggestions was a significant predictor of the performance of the assessors themselves, and that positive affective feedback was related to the performance of assessees. However, peer grading behaviors were not a significant predictor of project performance. This study explains the benefits of online peer assessment in general and highlights the importance of specific types of feedback. Moreover, it expands our understanding of how peer assessment affects the different parties involved.     

Peer review of laboratory reports for engineering students

ABSTRACT

Here, we present a module to introduce student peer review of laboratory reports to engineering students. Our findings show that students were positive and felt that they had learnt quite a lot from this experience. The most important part of the module was the classification scheme. The scheme was constructed to mimic the way an expert would argue when making a fair judgement of a laboratory report. Hence, our results may suggest that the success of the module design comes from actively engaging students in work that is more related to ‘arguing like an expert’ than to only supply feedback to peers, which in such a case would implicate a somewhat new direction for feedback research. For practitioners, our study suggests that important issues to consider in the design are (i) a clear and understandable evaluation framework, (ii) anonymity in the peer-review process and (iii) a small external motivation.     

Peer assessment in a project-based engineering course: comparing between on-campus and online learning environments

As the number of participants in online distance learning courses increases, peer assessment is becoming a popular strategy for evaluating open assignments and for breaking the social isolation surrounding distance education. Yet, the quality and characteristics of peer assessment in massive online courses has received little attention. Hence, this study was set to examine peer feedback quality and grading accuracy in a project-based course. The study applied a sequential exploratory mixed methods design. It included 339 participants who studied the same engineering course, but in three different modes: on-campus (n = 77), small private online course (n = 110), and massive open online course (MOOC) (n = 152). Content analysis of feedback comments identified four categories: reinforcement, statement, verification and elaboration, arranged in an ascending scale of cognitive ability. The findings indicated that the MOOC participants provided more feedback comments and volunteered to assess more projects than their counterparts did. However, the on-campus students provided higher quality feedback and their peer grading was better correlated with the grades assigned by the teaching assistants.     

The anonymous reviewer: the relationship between perceived expertise and the perceptions of peer feedback in higher education

Peer feedback often has positive effects on student learning processes and outcomes. However, students may not always be honest when giving and receiving peer feedback as they are likely to be biased due to peer relations, peer characteristics and personal preferences. To alleviate these biases, anonymous peer feedback was investigated in the current research. Research suggests that the expertise of the reviewer influences the perceived usefulness of the feedback. Therefore, this research investigated the relationship between expertise and the perceptions of peer feedback in a writing assignment of 41 students in higher education with a multilevel analysis. The results show that students perceive peer feedback as more adequate when knowing the reviewer perceives him/herself to have a high level of expertise. Furthermore, the results suggest that students who received feedback from a peer who perceives their expertise as closer to the reviewee’s own perceived expertise was more willing to improve his or her own assignment.     

Assessing postgraduate student perceptions and measures of learning in a peer review feedback process

Peer review feedback, developed to assist students with increasing the quality of group reports and developing peer review skills, was added to a master’s level Climate Change Policy and Planning unit. A pre- and post-survey was conducted to determine whether students found the process a valuable learning opportunity: 87% of students responding to the post-review survey indicated they saw benefit in both developing and receiving peer review feedback. Peer review design minimising the potential for plagiarism resulted in low levels of student concern surrounding plagiarism. Marks allocated by students were valid (consistent with the lecturer) and were generally reliable; however, distribution of marks had a higher variance where group report quality was low. Training on completing the peer review template could result in more reliable feedback. Consistent with the literature, the feedback developed during the peer review process focused on style and presentation preferentially to content. Seven out of eight group reports improved between report submissions, with all groups responding to peer review feedback. Peer review feedback and changes made to group reports indicated students had limited capacity to judge the quality of referencing and critical analysis.     

Peer relations in peer learning

Over the last decades, much research on peer learning practices has been conducted. Quantitative, experimental designs focusing on problems of cause and effect dominate. Consequently, effects on achievement are well documented, as is the influence of different conditions on the effect rate. In spite of the general acknowledgment of the importance of peer learning and a large amount of research on collective learning practices, questions regarding the quality of peer interaction, and how peer relations influence learning, are not well elaborated. This paper complements the discussion on effect focusing on the processes of interaction between peers, and relates these to theoretical perspectives on learning as fundamentally social. Inspired by meta-ethnography an integrative analysis across seven qualitative studies was accomplished. The approach enabled an investigation of peer interactions in different educational settings. The analysis elaborates on how instructional designs and students’ relational knowledge mediate interaction in peer learning. The paper further discusses the potential of approaches synthesising qualitative studies as a tool in qualitative research.     

Effects of online peer assessment on higher-order thinking: A meta-analysis

Online peer assessment (OPA) has been increasingly adopted to develop students' higher-order thinking (HOT). However, there has not been a synthesis of research findings on its effects. To fill this gap, 17 papers (published from 2000 to 2022) that reported either a comparison between a group using OPA (n = 7; k = 22) and a control group or a pre–post comparison (n = 10; k = 17) were reviewed in this meta-analysis. The overall effect of OPA on HOT was significant (g = 0.76). Furthermore, OPA exerted more significant effects on convergent HOT (eg, critical thinking, reasoning and reflective thinking; g = 0.97) than on divergent HOT (eg, creativity and problem-solving; g = 0.38). Reciprocal roles and anonymity were found to positively moderate the impacts of OPA on HOT, although their moderating effects were not statistically significant because of small sample size of studies in the analysis. The results of the meta-analysis reinforce the arguments for regarding OPA as a powerful learning tool to facilitate students' HOT development and reveal important factors that should be considered when adopting OPA to enhance students' HOT.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

• Online peer assessment (OPA) has significant positive impacts on learning achievement.
• OPA has been regarded as a potential approach to cultivating students' higher-order thinking (HOT) but has not been proved by meta-analysis.
• OPA should be carefully designed to maximise its effectiveness on learning.

What this paper adds

• OPA has been proved to significantly positively influence students' HOT via meta-analysis.
• OPA exerted more significant effects on convergent HOT than on divergent HOT.
• The potential of reciprocal roles and anonymity for moderating the impacts of OPA on HOT should not be underestimated.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• OPA could be a wise choice for practitioners when they help students to achieve a balanced development of HOT dispositions and skills.
• Students' divergent HOT can be encouraged in their uptake of peer feedback and by allowing them autonomy in deciding assessment criteria.
• OPA with design elements of reciprocal roles and anonymity has great potential to promote students' HOT.

     

Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider

This paper reviews studies of peer feedback from the novel perspective of the providers of that feedback. The possible learning benefits of providing peer feedback in online learning have not been extensively studied. The goal of this study was therefore to explore the process of providing online peer feedback as a learning activity for the provider. We concluded that (1) providing online peer feedback has several potential learning benefits for the provider; (2) when providing online peer feedback, students use different cognitive processes; (3) the cognitive processes and the potential learning benefits can be realised when students use specific elements in the feedback they provide.     

Grudges and gratitude: the social-affective impacts of peer assessment

Abstract

Students’ dissatisfaction with peer assessment has been widely documented. While most relevant literature places focus on the cognitive (content and uptake of feedback) or structural (feedback design) dimensions, students’ emotions in peer assessment have received scant attention. This study investigates the social-affective impacts of peer assessment by analysing students’ appeal letters addressed to their tutors, reflective posts in the online discussion forum and responses to a survey. A thematic analysis of data indicated three main aspects of students’ (dis)satisfaction: content, scores and process of peer assessment. The most negative emotion that students expressed was related to ‘disrespectful’ behaviour and attitudes of peer reviewers, whereas the feeling of appreciation was triggered by the helpful feedback attributes which were perceived as reflecting reviewers’ respect to others’ works. Students generally held mixed feelings toward peer assessment, valuing learning in the process of providing and receiving feedback but showing resistance to using peer assessment for summative purposes. The findings highlight the significance of respect in peer assessment and argue that the perceived lack of mutual respect seems to underpin the nature of students’ dissatisfaction. This study carries implications for nurturing students’ respectful attitudes and behaviour in and through peer assessment.     

Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment

This study examines the impact of an assessment training module on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Seventy-eight undergraduate students participated in the study. The participants completed an assessment training exercise, prior to engaging in peer-assessment activities. During the training, students reviewed learning concepts, discussed marking criteria, graded example projects and compared their evaluations with the instructor’s evaluation. Data were collected in the form of initial and final versions of students’ projects, students’ scoring of example projects before and after the assessment training, and written feedback that students provided on peer projects. Results of data analysis indicate that the assessment training led to a significant decrease in the discrepancy between student ratings and instructor rating of example projects. In addition, the degree of student vs. instructor discrepancy was highly predictive of the quality of feedback that students provided to their peers and the effectiveness of revisions that they made to their own projects upon receiving peer feedback. Smaller discrepancies in ratings were associated with provision of higher quality peer feedback during peer assessment, as well as better revision of initial projects after peer assessment.     

Understanding autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students: a case study in a Chinese university

Academic writing is a social practice in which the writer interacts with both texts and people and uses the interaction as a learning resource. While academic interaction in the classroom setting has been extensively investigated, student interaction that takes place without teacher supervision remains largely unexplored. Since autonomy is a key component of academic interaction, autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students may be of some interest. This paper reports on an exploratory case study of peer feedback among a small group of postgraduate students in a master’s programme in translation studies in a prestigious Chinese university. The findings offer insights into the role of peer feedback in advancing academic literacy and forming scholarly communities in an emerging discipline. The case study provides an opening into the research area of autonomous peer feedback and suggests avenues for further, more substantial research.     

Instructional scaffolds for learning from formative peer assessment: effects of core task,peer feedback,and dialogue

Formative peer assessment is an instructional method that offers many opportunities to foster students’ learning with respect to both the domain of the core task and students’ assessment skills. The contributions to this special issue effectively address earlier calls for more research into instructional scaffolds and the implementation of dialogic features in formative peer assessment. However, open issues remain regarding the role of assessment criteria, the benefit of formative peer assessment for transferable knowledge and skills, the role of metacognitive and cognitive processes in the provision and reception of peer feedback, and the proposed benefit of more interactive forms of formative peer assessment. Addressing the latter issue in particular, a framework of three dimensions of increasing interactivity is proposed in order to guide future research. These three dimensions comprise the learner’s engagement with the core task (low interactivity), the provision and reception of peer feedback (medium interactivity), and the learner’s engagement with argumentation, tutoring, and co-construction in dialogue with peers (high interactivity).