Technology-enhanced self and peer assessment to support student agency during group projects

Peer assessment and feedback is encouraged to enhance students' learning. The aim of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively analyse pre-clinical and clinical dental students' written peer feedback provided as part of a continuous, formative and structured peer assessment protocol. A total of 309 Year-2 and Year-5 dental students were invited to participate in a peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Consenting volunteer students were trained to observe each other whilst working in the skills laboratory (Year-2) and in the dental clinic (Year-5). Subsequently, they followed a structured protocol of peer assessment and peer feedback using specially designed work-based forms during a complete academic year. The content of their written feedback was coded according to the UK General Dental Council domain, sign (positive or negative), specificity (task specific or general), and grouped into themes. A total of 108 participants (40 Year-2 and 68 Year-5) completed 1169 peer assessment work-based forms (516 pre-clinical and 653 clinical); 94% contained written feedback. The large majority (82%) of Year-2 feedback represented the clinical domain, 89% were positive, 77% were task specific, and they were grouped into 14 themes. Year-5 feedback was related mostly to Management and Leadership (37%) and Communication (32%), 64% were positive, 75% task specific, and they were clustered into 24 themes. The content of the feedback showed notable differences between Year-2 and Year-5 students. Senior students focused more on Communication and Management and Leadership skills, whilst juniors were more concerned with clinical skills. Year-5 students provided 13% negative feedback compared to only 2% from Year-2. Regulatory focus theory is discussed to explain these differences. Both groups provided peer feedback on a wide and different range of themes. However, four themes emerged in both groups: efficiency, infection control, time management and working speed. A structured peer assessment framework can be used to guide pre-clinical and clinical students to provide peer feedback focused on different domains, and on contrasting signs and specificities. It can also present an opportunity to complement tutors' feedback.

This paper investigates the challenges faced by contemporary univer-sities and highlights the need for innovative educational strategies in response to social, cultural, and environmental changes. As the Inter-net shifts the role of educators from sole knowledge providers to facil-itators of student-centred learning, peer tutoring and peer feedback emerge as pivotal methods for enhancing academic success and per-sonal growth. Central to this discussion are two case studies from the University of Groningen's Masters of Didactics program in 2022-2023, which il-lustrates a practical application of these strategies. The paper also re-views theoretical foundations of these methods, drawing on construc-tivist learning theories and Zone of Proximal Development. Key ele-ments for successful implementation of the strategies discussed in the case studies include trained tutors, well-informed students, struc-tured sessions, personalized support and continuous feedback. These characteristics not only enhance the learning experience but also cul-tivate essential interpersonal skills. Our findings underscore the positive impact of integrating peer tu-toring and feedback on student engagement, collaboration, and aca-demic performance. This paper advocates for the widespread adoption of these pedagogical approaches in higher education, emphasizing their role in creating an inclusive and effective learning environment that prepares students for future academic and professional chal-lenges.

Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students

Although the benefits of online peer assessment and peer feedback on writing performance have been demonstrated, many learners might not recognize or benefit from specific change responses. This study investigated the correlation between online peer assessment and peer feedback on student writing performance. The correlation test was employed to analyze the data in this study. This study involved 145 undergraduate students (75 females and 70 males) from the State University of Malang, where the English course is mandatory for all students. This study revealed that online peer assessment and peer feedback on students' writing performance had a significant and strong relationship. On the other hand, the differences between the online peer assessment and peer feedback variables in each group were insignificant. Peer assessment and online peer feedback might have a close relationship; they can help pupils enhance their writing skills. However, there were no significant variations in each group's online peer assessment and peer feedback factors.

On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course

PurposeIn spite of the potential of peer feedback, research related to the international classroom and the development of intercultural competences remains limited. This paper aims to further explore this combination and associated gaps by presenting students’ perceptions of peer feedback on individual behaviour in group work.Design/methodology/approachSeveral studies have shown that peer feedback can be a powerful instrument in higher education. For this reason, this instrument is increasingly being deployed in the international classroom of a Dutch Business School (DBS), which has a student population of about 60 different nationalities. The present paper adopts an embedded case-study design in studying peer feedback within the international classroom.FindingsThe primary results of this study are twofold. First, they show that before joining DBS, the vast majority of international students have never been exposed to group work peer feedback. And second, they reveal that cultural background (bias) is a critical factor in how students provide and perceive peer feedback. Students from high-context cultures struggle with direct feedback provided by students from low-context cultures. Furthermore, the results show that domestic cultural values “lack consideration” when dealing with the contrasts in cultural values of non-domestic (international) students.Originality/valueThis study indicates that several aspects of the students’ cultural background have a direct impact on how they provide and perceive individual peer feedback on their behaviour in group work. Furthermore, it argues that peer feedback, when used as an instrument, requires specific training and guidance of students with regard to cultural differences, values and perceptions.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among collective efficacy, team cohesion, social loafing, and Tug of War’s performance. Sixty Tug of War’s teams from 22 elementary schools, including 234 males and 244 females (mean age = 12.53 ±0.47) participated in this study . Instruments measured subjects’ Collective Efficacy Questionnaire and team cohesion with Group Environment Questionnaire (GEQ; Chou, 2000) in the first stage. Following the pen-and –pencil tests, subjects were assessed with their pulling performance under individual and collective pulling conditions. finally, the author collected subjects’ Tug of War competition records after each tournament. Pearson product-moment correlation found that collective efficacy, team cohesion, and Tug of War’s performance were all positively correlated. However, collective efficacy and team cohesion were both negatively correlated to social loafing, and social loafing was negatively correlated to Tug of War’s performance. Further, a multiple stepwise regression found that collective efficacy and task cohesion predicted Tug of War’s performance, This study supported the most research hypotheses and theoretical predictions. The authors suggested that future research should extend social loafing theory to other social-psychological constructs such as achievement goals, attributions, and sport enjoyment so to find its theoretical associations.

ABSTRACTProblem: Graduate medical trainees must be prepared to practice in a quality-driven system that values adherence to and documentation of evidence-based care. Few validated approaches exist to teach these skills. Our objective was to develop, implement, and evaluate an ambulatory practice improvement curriculum capitalizing on peer feedback aimed at improving cardiology fellow guideline knowledge, adherence, and chart documentation. Intervention: Four outpatient topics were reviewed in dedicated 1-hour sessions: stable ischemic heart disease, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and aortic valvular disease. Each session began with peer review, critique, and guideline adherence discussion of deidentified outpatient fellow clinic charts, followed by discussion of clinical guidelines. The open discussion of real clinic notes provided a forum for peer feedback exchange. Before each session and after the final session, participants completed a multiple-choice knowledge assessment and self-assessment of comfort with the guidelines. To evaluate the potential effect on patient care, random clinic chart audits were conducted before and after the curriculum using a chart scoring system. Context: Although the format is broadly applicable, the specific curriculum content was designed for a cardiology fellowship cohort in a large academic medical center. It was organized and implemented by 2 cardiology fellows under the direction and supervision of program directors. The curriculum was implemented during prescheduled noon conference hours. The intention was to carry forward this ambulatory curriculum in subsequent years and to use the first 4 sessions to study its potential successes and opportunities for improvement. Outcome: All 22 general cardiology fellows attended at least two sessions (M = 3.1). Knowledge test scores rose from 52.6% to 73.0% (20.4% increase, p < .001), 95% confidence interval (CI) [13.6%, 27.2%]. Self-reported guidelines knowledge improved by 15.1% (p = .002), 95% CI [6.2%, 24.0%], and self-reported documentation improved by 12.5% (p = .008), 95% CI [3.8%, 21.7%]. Chart audit scores improved by 17.8% (p < .001), 95% CI [10.6%, 25.0%], driven in part by 16.4% improvement in adherence to Class I therapies (p = .001). Lessons Learned: A targeted curriculum combining peer chart review, feedback, and guideline discussion was associated with significant improvement in fellows' knowledge and adherence to evidence-based therapies. Peer assessment and group-based education and feedback can be leveraged to improve trainee education and impact patient care.

Peer-assisted learning (PAL) has been recommended as an educational strategy to improve students' skill acquisition and supplement the role of the clinical instructor (CI). How frequently students actually engage in PAL in different settings is unknown. To determine the perceived frequency of planned and unplanned PAL (peer modeling, peer feedback and assessment, peer mentoring) in different settings. Cross-sectional study. Laboratory and collegiate clinical settings. A total of 933 students, 84 administrators, and 208 CIs representing 52 (15%) accredited athletic training education programs. Three versions (student, CI, administrator) of the Athletic Training Peer Assisted Learning Survey (AT-PALS) were administered. Cronbach α values ranged from .80 to .90. Administrators' and CIs' perceived frequency of 3 PAL categories under 2 conditions (planned, unplanned) and in 2 settings (instructional laboratory, collegiate clinical). Self-reported frequency of students' engagement in 3 categories of PAL in 2 settings. Administrators and CIs perceived that unplanned PAL (0.39 ± 0.22) occurred more frequently than planned PAL (0.29 ± 0.19) regardless of category or setting (F(1,282) = 83.48, P < .001). They perceived that PAL occurred more frequently in the collegiate clinical (0.46 ± 0.22) than laboratory (0.21 ± 0.24) setting regardless of condition or category (F(1,282) = 217.17, P < .001). Students reported engaging in PAL more frequently in the collegiate clinical (3.31 ± 0.56) than laboratory (3.26 ± 0.62) setting regardless of category (F(1,860) = 13.40, P < .001). We found a main effect for category (F(2,859) = 1318.02, P < .001), with students reporting they engaged in peer modeling (4.01 ± 0.60) more frequently than peer mentoring (2.99 ± 0.88) (P < .001) and peer assessment and feedback (2.86 ± 0.64) (P < .001). Participants perceived that students engage in unplanned PAL in the collegiate clinical setting with a stronger inclination toward engagement in peer modeling. Educators should develop planned PAL activities to capitalize on the inherent desire of the students to collaborate with their peers.

Evaluation: REA-DICKINS, PAULINE and GERMAINE, KEVIN. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992, 175 pp., £6.95.

In health-related professions, education has unique challenges. Problem-based learning can be extremely useful and driven by strategies such as group-work (GW) and peer assessment (PA), which are both used as formative and assessment tools. This study aimed to explore experience and perceptions about GW and PA held by educators and students in optometry. In a first survey, 45 Italian educators (43.8 ± 13.0 years old) of optometric clinical modules answered an email questionnaire investigating their attitudes towards GW and PA. In a second survey, 66 3rd-year undergraduates (22.5 ± 2.0 years old) answered a questionnaire investigating the perception and attitudes towards GW and PA at the beginning and at the end of a module of Advanced Optometry structured with a formative/summative GW activity with a final PA. Two-thirds of optometry educators declared they use GW, but not as a summative assessment tool. Only a quarter of the sample answered that they used PA at least once. Educators’ attitudes towards GW were more positive than PA (p &lt; 0.001). About 60% and 80% of the interviewed students stated they have never participated in GW and PA, respectively. Students’ pre-course attitudes towards GW and PA resulted in values close to the middle of the scale with no significant differences and positive correlations between them (p &lt; 0.001). When students’ GW attitudes were compared with educators’ GW attitudes, the latter were more positive. Students’ post-course attitudes towards GW and PA were enhanced. Although GW and PA are considered very good strategies to improve teaching, the results of the present study have demonstrated that the use of these strategies in Italian optometric higher education is limited. However, the study has also demonstrated that Italian optometry educators have positive attitudes towards “social” teaching strategies especially for GW. Furthermore, optometry students showed improved attitudes towards these strategies once exposed to them. Overall, the results of the study open the possibility to integrate “social” teaching strategies to improve the effectiveness of optometry education.

Peer assessment, also known as peer feedback or peer evaluation, is a tool used in medical education for students to provide and receive constructive feedback. In undergraduate medical education, peer feedback is a method of assessment that is not used commonly; however, its use is on the rise. In this literature-based guide, we discuss the advantages of peer assessment, as well as tips for implementation (including training of students and faculty and assessment tools/instruments) and strategies to overcome barriers to its use. Effective utilization of peer feedback can provide educators with an opportunity to evaluate attributes that are often difficult to assess, including professionalism, teamwork, work habits, and communication skills. Constructive feedback can raise learner awareness about performance and guide future decisions and action plans for improvement. Overall, when used appropriately, peer feedback can be a valuable and effective addition to the arsenal of assessments in medical education.

The examination-oriented assessment methods have been widely employed in Macau but the over-dependence on such methods may hinder students’ balanced development of mathematical proficiency (Morrison &amp; Tang, 2002; Schoenfeld, 2007). Peer assessment may compensate the limitation of those methods by engaging students actively to assess. However, little research has focused on the implementation of peer assessment in Macau secondary school. This dissertation reports a study which implemented a five-step peer assessment in an eighth grade mathematics lesson in Macau based on Ploegh at al.’s (2009) and Tillema et al.’s (2011) frameworks, in which the quality criteria are taken into account for revising the procedures. 16 students participated in three action cycles and the action plan was modified to explore how the changes to the peer assessment may influence students’ learning and students’ views towards the implementation of peer assessment.&#13;\n&#13;\nThe results show that it is effective to establish a formative peer assessment to promote students’ mathematical learning in Macau by adopting the frameworks. The students in general held positive attitude towards the implementation of the peer assessment. They regarded it as a fair assessment, appreciated the extra opportunity to discuss mathematics, and treated it as a way to collect more feedback on their strength and weakness. Peer assessment also served as a learning activity which helped them gain deeper understanding of mathematics.&#13;\n&#13;\nIt was found that students’ involvement in the setting of the assessment criteria, making judgment and writing narrative feedback improved students’ use of mathematical language to express their ideas. Providing more opportunities to judge and discuss mathematical problems also fostered the development of their mathematical proficiency. This study also reveals that asking peers for feedback and discussion about the feedback is an efficient way to develop students’ adaptive reasoning. The students’ change of performance in the action cycles also suggests that peer assessment has the potential to help the students access higher level of development in their zone of proximal development (ZPD) and balance the role of authority in mathematics classroom.

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.

Peer feedback serves as a valuable strategy for improving students’ writing proficiency. Over the past forty years, peer assessment, review, and feedback have been widely promoted, with a significant body of research emerging in both first language (L1) and second language (L2) writing. Nevertheless, limited studies have delved into how students perceive and respond to their peers’ written work in varying contexts, as well as the underlying reasons for their reactions. This study aims to explore students’ perspectives on the implementation of peer feedback during the writing of expansion texts. Specifically, it examines students’ emotional responses, their engagement in the feedback process, their reactions to feedback received, and whether the benefits of peer feedback established in earlier research remain relevant to current learners. Employing a qualitative approach and a case study design, the study draws on questionnaire responses and archived materials from two English education students at one of the universities in West Java who participated in peer feedback activities. The findings reveal that self-confidence affects students’ engagement with feedback, while an organized peer feedback process helps in correcting mistakes and improving writing quality. For future research, it is recommended to include a larger sample size, explore different educational levels, and examine the long-term impact of peer feedback on students’ writing development.