Skip to content
2018
Volume 75, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0010-096X
  • E-ISSN: 1939-9006

Abstract

Qualitative and then quantitative analysis of student review comments assessing peer review instructions found that students needed even more direction and structure than initially given. Specifically, shorter feedback statements—a twenty-one-to forty-word range—can be useful if they provide both evaluative and suggestive comments to guide revision.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/ccc2024753513
2024-02-01
2024-06-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berlant Lauren. Cruel Optimism. Duke UP 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Boud David. “Reframing Assessment as If Learning Was Important.” Rethinking Assessment for Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term edited by Boud David and Fachikov Nancy, Routledge 2007, pp 14–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carless David, and Boud David. “The Development of Student Feedback Literacy: Enabling Uptake of Feedback.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 43, no. 8 2018, pp 1315–25, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Carless David, and Winstone Naomi. “Teacher Feedback Literacy and Its Interplay with Student Feedback Literacy.” Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 28, no. 1 2020, pp 150–63, https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chang Carrie. L2 Peer Review: Insights from EFL Taiwanese Composition Classrooms. Crane 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chang Carrie. “Two Decades of Research in L2 Peer Review.” Journal of Writing Research, vol. 8, no. 1 2016, pp 81–117, https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.08.01.03.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cho Kwangsu, and MacArthur Charles. “Learning by Reviewing.” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 103, no. 1 2011, pp 73–84, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021950.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cho Kwangsu, et al. “Commenting on Writing: Typology and Perceived Helpfulness of Comments from Novice Peer Reviewers and Subject Matter Experts.” Written Communication, vol. 23, no. 3 2006, pp 260–94, https://doi.org/10.1177/074108830628926.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gielen Mario, and Wever Bram De. “Structuring the Peer Assessment Process: A Multilevel Approach for the Impact on Product Improvement and Peer Feedback Quality.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 31, no. 5 2015, pp 435–49, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12096.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hart-Davidson Bill, and Meeks Melissa G. “Feedback Analytics for Peer Learning: Indicators of Writing Improvement in Digital Environments.” Improving Outcomes: Disciplinary Writing, Local Assessment, and the Aim of Fairness edited by Elliot Norbert and Kelly-Riley Diane, MLA 2021, pp 79–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hattie John, and Timperley Helen. “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, vol. 77, no. 1 2007, pp 81–112, https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ho Mei-ching, and Savignon Sandra J. “Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Peer Review in EFL Writing.” CALICO Journal, vol. 24, no. 2 2014, pp 269–90, https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v24i2.269-290.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jurkowski Susanne. “Do Question Prompts Support Students in Working with Peer Feedback?” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 92 2018, pp 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.07.003.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kirschner Paul A., et al. “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, ProblemBased, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching.” Educational Psychologist, vol. 41, no. 2 2006, pp 75–86, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lundstrom Kristi, and Baker Wendy. “To Give Is Better than to Receive: The Benefits of Peer Review to the Reviewer’s Own Writing.” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 18, no. 1 2009, pp 30–43, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. McLeod Michael, et al. “Designing Effective Reviews: Helping Students Give Helpful Feedback.” Eli Review, https://elireview.com/content/td/reviews/.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Min Hui-Tzu. “Training Students to Become Successful Peer Reviewers.” System, vol. 33, no. 2 2005, pp 293–308, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Moore Cindy, et al. “Creating a Culture of Assessment in Writing Programs and Beyond.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 61, no. 1 2009, pp 107–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Nicol David. “From Monologue to Dialogue: Improving Written Feedback in Mass Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 35, no. 5 2010, pp 501–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Nicol David, et al. “Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: A Peer Review Perspective.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 39, no. 1 2014, pp 102–22, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Oleksiak Timothy. “A Queer Praxis for Peer Review.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 72, no. 2 2020, pp 306–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Patchan Melissa M., and Schunn Christian D. “Understanding the Benefits of Providing Peer Feedback: How Students Respond to Peers’ Texts of Varying Quality.” Instructional Science, vol. 43, no. 5 2015, pp 591–614, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Patchan Melissa M., et al. “A Validation Study of Students’ End Comments: Comparing Comments by Students, a Writing Instructor, and a Content Instructor.” Journal of Writing Research, vol. 1, no. 2 2009, pp 124–52, https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2009.01.02.2.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Reid E. Shelley. “Peer Review for Peer Review’s Sake: Resituating Peer Review Pedagogy.” Peer Pressure, Peer Power: Theory and Practice in Peer Review and Response for the Writing Classroom edited by Corbett Steven J., LaFrance Michelle, and Decker Teagan E., Fountainhead P 2014, pp 217–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sadler D. Royce. “Beyond Feedback: Developing Student Capability in Complex Appraisal.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 35, no. 5 2010, pp 535–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903541015.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Saldaña Johnny. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 4th ed., SAGE Publishing 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Vardi Iris. “The Relationship Between Feedback and Change in Tertiary Student Writing in the Disciplines.” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, vol. 20, no. 3 2008, pp 350–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wang Weiqiang. “Students’ Perceptions of Rubric-Referenced Peer Feedback on EFL Writing: A Longitudinal Inquiry.” Assessing Writing, vol. 19 2014, pp 80–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.008.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Winstone Naomi E., et al. “Supporting Learners’ Agentic Engagement with Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes.” Educational Psychologist, vol. 52, no. 1 2017, pp 17–37, https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wu Yong, and Schunn Christian D. “From Feedback to Revisions: Effects of Feedback Features and Perceptions.” Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 60 2020, Article 101826, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101826.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Yallop Roger, et al. “The Affect and Effect of Asynchronous Written Feedback Comments on the Peer Feedback Process: An Ethnographic Case-Study Approach within One L2 English Doctorate Writing Group.” Journal of Writing Research, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 531–600, doi:10.17239/jowr‑2021.12.03.02.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.58680/ccc2024753513
Loading
/content/journals/10.58680/ccc2024753513
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error