Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The development of student feedback literacy through peer feedback in the online learning environment Cover

The development of student feedback literacy through peer feedback in the online learning environment

Open Access
|Dec 2022

References

  1. Bıkmaz Bilgen, Ö., & Doğan, N. (2017). The comparison of interrater reliability estimating techniques. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(1), 63–78.
  2. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Los Angeles, CA, USA: Sage Publications.
  3. Carless, D. (2022). From teacher transmission of information to student feedback literacy: Activating the learner role in feedback processes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 143–153. doi:10.1177/1469787420945845
  4. Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
  5. Cheng, M. W. T., & Chan, C. K. Y. (2019). An experimental test: Using rubrics for reflective writing to develop reflection. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61, 176–182. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.04.001
  6. Cheng, K. H., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2015). Examining the role of feedback messages in undergraduate students’ writing performance during an online peer assessment activity. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 78–84. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.001
  7. Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2016). Supporting second language writing using multimodal feedback. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 58–74. doi:10.1111/flan.12183
  8. Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.05.005
  9. Er, E., Dimitriadis, Y., & Gašević, D. (2020). A collaborative learning approach to dialogic peer feedback: A theoretical framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(4), 586–600. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1786497
  10. Espasa, A., Guasch, T., Mayordomo, R. M., Martinez-Melo, M., & Carless, D. (2018). A dialogic feedback index measuring key aspects of feedback processes in online learning environments. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(3), 499–513. doi:10.1080/07294360.2018.1430125
  11. Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.,). London, England: Sage Publications.
  12. Filius, R. M., de Kleijn, R. A., Uijl, S. G., Prins, F. J., van Rijen, H. V., & Grobbee, D. E. (2018). Strengthening dialogic peer feedback aiming for deep learning in SPOCs. Computers & Education, 125, 86–100. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.004
  13. Filius, R. M., de Kleijn, R. A., Uijl, S. G., Prins, F. J., van Rijen, H. V., & Grobbee, D. E. (2019). Audio peer feedback to promote deep learning in online education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(5), 607–619. doi:10.1111/jcal.12363
  14. Foo, S. Y. (2021). Analysing peer feedback in asynchronous online discussions: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 4553–4572. doi:10.1007/s10639-021-10477-4
  15. Foster, J. J. (2001). Data analysis using SPSS for Windows versions 8 to 10: A beginner's guide (2nd ed., pp. 222–223). London: Sage Publications.
  16. Gikandi, J. W., & Morrow, D. (2016). Designing and implementing peer formative feedback within online learning environments. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(2), 153–170. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1058853
  17. Göktaş, Y. (2016). Öğretim Teknolojilerinde Akademik Yazım - (Academic Writing in Instructional Technology). Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/6268100/%C3%96%C4%9Fretim_Teknolojilerinde_Akademik_Yaz%C4%B1m_Academic_Writing_in_Instructional_Technology_
  18. Green, S. (2019). What students don’t make of feedback in higher education: An illustrative study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 83–94. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2019.01.010
  19. Greene, J. C. (2005). The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 28(2), 207–211. doi:10.1080/01406720500256293
  20. Gürsakal, N. (2012). Betimsel İstatistik. Bursa: Dora Publication.
  21. Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2020). The development of student feedback literacy: The influences of teacher feedback on peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(5), 680–696. doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545
  22. Hey-Cunningham, A. J., Ward, M. H., & Miller, E. J. (2020). Making the most of feedback for academic writing development in postgraduate research: Pilot of a combined programme for students and supervisors. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(2), 182–194. doi:10.1080/14703297.2020.1714472
  23. Iglesias Pérez, M. C., Vidal-Puga, J., & Pino Juste, M. R. (2020). The role of self and peer assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(3), 683–692. doi:10.1080/03075079.2020.1783526
  24. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. doi:10.3102/0013189×033007014
  25. Karagöz, Y. (2010). Nonparametrik Tekniklerin Güç ve Etkinlikleri. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(33), 18–40. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/esosder/issue/6147/82524
  26. Kennette, L., & Chapman, M. 2021. Providing positive student feedback in an online environment. Academia Letters, 203, 1–3. doi: 10.20935/al203
  27. Ketonen, L., Nieminen, P., & Hähkiöniem, M. (2020). The development of secondary students’ feedback literacy: Peer assessment as an intervention. The Journal of Educational Research, 113(6), 407–417. doi:10.1080/00220671.2020.1835794
  28. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310
  29. Malecka, B., Boud, D., & Carless, D. (2020). Eliciting, processing and enacting feedback: Mechanisms for embedding student feedback literacy within the curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–15. doi:10.1080/13562517.2020.1754784
  30. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications.
  31. 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. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
  32. Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020). Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 527–540. doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1667955
  33. Özsoy, O. (2010). İktisatçılar ve İşletmeciler İçin İstatistik Excel Uygulamalı. Ankara, Turkey: Siyasal Publication.
  34. Panadero, E., & Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 21(2), 133–148. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2013.877872
  35. Paterson, C., Paterson, N., Jackson, W., & Work, F. (2020). What are students’ needs and preferences for academic feedback in higher education? A systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 85, 104236. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104236
  36. Planas-Lladó, A., Feliu, L., Arbat, G., Pujol, J., Suñol, J. J., Castro, F., & Martí, C. (2021). An analysis of teamwork based on self and peer evaluation in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(2), 191–207. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1763254
  37. Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 879–896. doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.483513
  38. Prins, F. J., de Kleijn, R., & van Tartwijk, J. (2017). Students’ use of a rubric for research theses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(1), 128–150. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1085954
  39. Razı, S. (2015). Development of a rubric to assess academic writing incorporating plagiarism detectors. Sage Open, 5(2), 1–13. doi:10.1177/2158244015590162
  40. Sutton, P. (2012). Conceptualizing feedback literacy: Knowing, being, and acting. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(1), 31–40. doi:10.1080/14703297.2012.647781
  41. Tian, L., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context. System, 91, 102247. doi:10.1016/j.system.2020.102247
  42. To, J. (2016). ‘This is not what I need’: Conflicting assessment feedback beliefs in a post-secondary institution in Hong Kong. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 21(4), 447–467. doi:10.1080/13596748.2016.1226588
  43. Wei, W., Sun, Y., & Xu, X. (2020). Investigating the impact of increased student feedback literacy level on their expectations on university teachers’ feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(7), 1092–1103. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1846017
  44. Winstone, N. E., Mathlin, G., & Nash, R. A. (2019). Building feedback literacy: Students’ perceptions of the developing engagement with feedback toolkit. Frontiers in Education, 4(39), 1–11. doi:10.3389/feduc.2019.00039
  45. Winstone, N., Nash, R., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Education Psychologist, 52(1), 17–37. doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
  46. Wood, J. M. (2022). Supporting the uptake process with dialogic peer screencast feedback: A sociomaterial perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–23. doi:10.1080/13562517.2022.2042243
  47. Xu, Y., & Carless, D. (2017). ‘Only true friends could be cruelly honest’: Cognitive scaffolding and social-affective support in teacher feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(7), 1082–1094. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1226759
  48. Yang, M., & Carless, D. (2013). The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 285–297. doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.719154
  49. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Nitel veri analizi. Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin Publications.
  50. Yu, S., & Liu, C. (2021). Improving student feedback literacy in academic writing: An evidence-based framework. Assessing Writing, 48, 100525. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2021.100525
  51. Zhan, Y. (2019). Conventional or sustainable? Chinese university students’ thinking about feedback used in their English lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(7), 973–986. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1557105
  52. Zheng, L., Cui, P., Li, X., & Huang, R. (2018). Synchronous discussion between assessors and assessees in web-based peer assessment: Impact on writing performance, feedback quality, meta-cognitive awareness and self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 500–514. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1370533
  53. Zong, Z., Schunn, C. D., & Wang, Y. (2020). Learning to improve the quality peer feedback through experience with peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(6), 973–992. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1833179
Language: English
Page range: 36 - 52
Published on: Dec 30, 2022
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2022 Yasemin Karal, Rabia Özdemir Sarıalioğlu, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.