Abstract
This study investigates the effects of prompting on secondary students’ written peer feedback in chemistry investigation reports. In particular, we examined students’ feedback features in relation to the use of criteria, feedback specificity, and feedback levels. A quasi-experimental pre-test post-test design was adopted. Reviewers in the prompted condition were provided with question prompts that asked them to pose written feedback to their peers on what they did or did not do well and suggestions for improvement, while reviewers in the unprompted condition gave written peer feedback without prompts. The findings showed that prompted peer feedback has a significant effect on the number of comments related to Knowledge of errors, Suggestions for improvement and Process level feedback. This study supports the view that prompting peer feedback in the use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels opens up opportunity for reviewers to engage more meaningfully with peer feedback in report writing tasks.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
NCEA is the national qualification system for students at New Zealand secondary schools.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., et al. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspective. Science Education, 88(3), 397–419.
Althauser, R., & Darnall, K. (2001). Enhancing critical reading and writing through peer reviews: An exploration of assisted performance. Teaching Sociology, 29, 23–35.
Andrade, H. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment. New York: Routledge.
Berthold, K., Nuckles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564–577.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Berkshire. England: Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–73.
Boekaerts, M. (2006). Self-regulation and effort investment. In K. A. Renninger & I. E. Sigel (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 345–377)., Child psychology in practice New York: Wiley.
Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Brown, G. T. L., Harris, L. R., & Harnett, J. (2012). Teacher beliefs about feedback within an assessment for learning environment: Endorsement of improved learning over student well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 968–978.
Burnett, P. C., & Mandel, V. (2010). Praise and Feedback in the Primary Classroom: Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 10, 145–154.
Chen, N.-S., Wei, C.-W., Wu, K.-T., & Uden, L. (2009). Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels. Computers & Education, 52(2), 283–291.
Cho, Y. H., & Cho, K. (2011). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science, 39, 629–643.
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338.
Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409–426.
Davis, E. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 91–142.
Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: Prompting for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819–837.
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2006). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. London & New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving assessment through student involvement: practical solutions for learning in higher and further education. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70, 287–322.
Frederiksen, J. R. & White, B. J. (1997). Reflective assessment of students’ research within an inquiry-based middle school science curriculum. In Proceedings of Annual meeting of the AERA conference, Chicago, IL.
Gan, M. J. S. (2011). The effects of prompts and explicit coaching on peer feedback quality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, available online at https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/6630.
Gan, M. J. S., & Hill, M. (2014). Using a dialogical approach to examine peer feedback during chemistry investigative task discussion. Research in Science Education, 1–23.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning & Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.
Gielen, S. (2007). Peer assessment as a tool for learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium.
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304–315.
Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (2003). Understanding and using scientific evidence. London: Sage.
Gott, R., & Roberts, R. (2008). Concepts of evidence and their role in open-ended practical investigations and scientific literacy; background to published papers. UK: The School of Education, Durham University.
Haigh, M., France, B., & Forret, M. (2005). Is “doing science” in New Zealand classrooms an expression of scientific inquiry? International Journal of Science Education, 27, 215–226.
Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Harnett, J. (2014). Understanding classroom feedback practices: A study of New Zealand student experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 1–27.
Hattie, J. A. C., & Gan, M. J. S. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Henderlong, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children’s intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 774–795.
Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science: Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Rotterdam: Sense.
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133–152.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kim, M. (2009). The impact of an elaborated assessee’s role in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 105–114.
Kluger, A. N., & 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(2), 254–284.
Lin, X., & Lehman, J. D. (1999). Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based biology environment: Effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 837–858.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995). Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: stances, functions and content. Language Learning, 45, 605–655.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43.
MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
McConlogue, T. (2014). Making judgements: investigating the process of composing and receiving peer feedback. Studies in Higher Education, pp. 1–13.
Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293–308.
Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of training peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141.
Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research review. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 745–783). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. Van Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 125–143). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nelson, M., & Schunn, C. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401.
Ngar-Fun, L., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23–38.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student-derived marking criteria in peer and self assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 309–323.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.
Ploegh, K., Tillema, H. H., & Segers, M. S. R. (2009). In search of quality criteria in peer assessment practices. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35, 102–109.
Prins, F., Sluijsmans, D., & Kirschner, P. (2006). Feedback for general practitioners in training: Quality, styles and preferences. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11, 289–303.
Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioural Science, 28, 4–13.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal, 59(1), 23–30.
Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.
Sadler, R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, 159–179.
Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2002). The training of peer assessment skills to promote the development of reflection skills in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29(1), 23–42.
Sluijsmans, D. M. A., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2000). A peer assessment model. Heerlen: Open University of the Netherlands.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290–312.
Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & 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(4), 291–303.
Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analysing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 237–246.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249–276.
Topping, K. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645.
Tsivitanidou, O. E., Zacharia, Z. C., & Hovardas, T. (2011). Investigating secondary school students’ unmediated peer assessment skills. Learning and Instruction, 21, 506–519.
Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 316–327.
Wilson, T., Perry, M., Anderson, C. J., & Grosshandler, D. (2011). Engaging young students in scientific investigations: prompting for meaningful reflection. Instructional Science, 40, 19–46.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gan, M.J.S., Hattie, J. Prompting secondary students’ use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels during an investigative task. Instr Sci 42, 861–878 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9319-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9319-4