Abstract
This chapter reports the results of three research studies on peer assessment carried out in different countries where it is an unusual practice (France, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic). The three research studies focus on different competences and different disciplines (sciences and mathematics), but they all involve inquiry-based approaches at primary and secondary school level. In the French study, the data reported in this chapter explore relationships between success in task processing and the ability to mark a peer’s written artefact on the same task. The Swiss research study examines the type of peer feedback students offer their peers while assessing their models, based on a fine-grained analysis of peer feedback comments. In the Czech Republic, the study focuses on students’ reflection on peer assessment in inquiry lessons. The three studies conclude the necessity of allowing the sharing of “knowledge authority” in the classroom to evolve and to be integrated into usual classroom practice. However, researchers have a divergent view on the sharing of responsibility for validation of knowledge between the student and the teacher. Moreover, we can conclude that peer assessment can be a way to trigger metacognitive work on knowledge and competences in science and on assessment criteria and teacher expectations, at a class level and individual student level.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this specific class, 21 gaps were positive and 21 negative.
- 2.
In this specific class, 32 gaps were positive and 21 negative.
References
Allal, L. (1999). Impliquer l’apprenant dans le processus d’évaluation: promesses et pièges de l’autoévaluation. In Depover, C., & Noël, B. (1999). L’évaluation des compétences et des processus cognitifs. Modèles, pratiques et contextes (pp. 35–56).
Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 427–441.
Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 7e74.
Brown, G. T., Irving, S. E., Peterson, E. R., & Hirschfeld, G. H. (2009). Use of interactive–informal assessment practices: New Zealand secondary students’ conceptions of assessment. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 97–111.
Chang, H. Y., & Chang, H. C. (2013). Scaffolding students’ online critiquing of expert-and peer-generated molecular models of chemical reactions. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2028–2056.
Chang, H. Y., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94(1), 73–94.
Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260–294.
Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (Eds.). (1999). Doing qualitative research (pp. 163–177). Sage Publications.
Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Education at a Glance. (2015). OECD Indicators Czech Republic. DOI:10.1787/eag-2015-51
Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 54–98.
Falchikov, N. (1996). Improving learning through critical peer feedback and reflection. In Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education. Proceedings of HERDSA Conference.
Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322.
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.
Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self-and peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53–70.
Harlen, W. (2013). Assessment & inquiry-based science education: Issues in policy and practice. Trieste: Global Network of Science Academies.
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharias, C. Z. (2014). Peer versus Expert feedback: Investigating the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students assessing each other’s science web-portfolios. Computers & Education, 71, 133–152.
Husfeld, V. (2009). Aus der Praxis der Leistungsbeurteilung. In D. Fischer, A. Strittmatter, & U. Vögeli-Mantovani (Eds.), Noten, was denn sonst? Leistungsbeurteilung und -bewertung (pp. 33–40). Zürich: Verlag LCH.
Kane, R. G., & Chimwayange, C. (2014). Teacher action research and student voice: Making sense of learning in secondary school. Action Research, 12(1), 52–77.
Košťálová, H., Miková, Š., & Stang, J. (2008). Školní hodnocení žáků a studentů se zaměřením na slovní hodnocení [School assessment of students]. Praha: Portál.
Kratochvílová, J. (2011). Systém hodnocení a sebehodnocení žáků. [System of assessment and self-assessment of pupils]. Brno: MSD.
Kronig, W. (2009). Schulnoten–Glasperlen des Bildungssystems. Noten, was denn sonst, 27–31.
Laufková, V., & Novotná, K. (2014). Školní hodnocení z pohledu žáků [School assessment from the students’ perspective] Orbis scholae, (1), 111–127.
Le Hebel, F., Montpied, P., & Moulin, M. (2016). Does peer assessment help students’ understanding? Paper presented at the International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education, Tokyo, Japan.
Le Monde. (2016). Quand les étudiants se forment entre eux. http://www.lemonde.fr/campus/article/2016/03/09/quand-les-etudiants-se-forment-entre-eux_4878964_4401467.html
Lukášová, H. (2012). Proměny pojetí vzdělávání a školního hodnocení [Changes in conceptualisation of the education and school assessment]. Praha: Asociace waldorfských škol ČR.
McDermott, L. C., Shaffer, P. S., & Rosenquist, M. L. The Physics Education Group.(1996). Physics by inquiry.
Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. Van Merrie¨nboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 125–143). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug–related tutoring feedback in a computer–based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16, 310–322.
Nicolaou, C. T., & Constantinou, C. P. (2014). Assessment of the modeling competence: A systematic review and synthesis of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 13, 52–73.
Novotná, K., & Krabsová, V. (2013). Formativní hodnocení: Případová studie [Formative assessment: case study]. Pedagogika, 63(3), 355–371.
Organisation de coopération et de développement économique. (2005). L’évaluation formative: pour un meilleur apprentissage dans les classes secondaires. Paris: OCDE.
Pluta, W. J., Chinn, C. A., & Duncan, R. G. (2011). Learners’ epistemic criteria for good scientific models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 486–511.
Prins, F. J., Sluijsmans, D. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006). Feedback for general practitioners in training: Quality, styles, and preferences. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11(3), 289–303.
Saari, H., & Viiri, J. (2003). A research-based teaching sequence for teaching the concept of modelling to seventh-grade students. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1333–1352.
Santiago, P., Gilmore, A., Nusche, D., & Sammons, P. (2012). OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education: Czech Republic 2012. OECD.
Schwarz, C. V., & White, B. Y. (2005). Metamodeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165–205.
Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., et al. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632–654.
Sedová, K., Svarícek, R., & Salamounová, Z. (2012). Komunikace ve skolní tríde [Communication in the classroom]. Praha: Portál.
Slavík, J. (2003). Autonomní a heteronomní pojetí školního hodnocení – aktuální problem pedagogické teorie a praxe [Autonomous and heteronomous assessment – current issue of educational theory and practice]. Pedagogika, 53(1), 5–25.
Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2002). Student involvement in assessment, the training of peer-assessment skills. Interuniversity Centre for Educational Research.
Sluijsmans, D. M., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 443–454.
Smit, R. (2009). Die formative Beurteilung und ihr Nutzen für die Entwicklung von Lernkompetenz. In Eine empirische Studie in der Sekundarstufe 1. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH.
Starý, K. (2006). Sumativní a formativní hodnocení [Summative and formative assessment]. Portál RVP, www.rvp.cz
Stefani, L. A. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69–75.
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.
Strijbos, J. W., & Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 265–269.
Tiberghien, A. (2011). Conception et analyse de ressources d’enseignement : le cas des démarches d’investigation. In M. Grangeat (Ed.), Les démarches d’investigation dans l’enseignement scientifique Pratiques de classe, travail collectif enseignant, acquisitions des élèves (pp. 185–212). Lyon: INRP.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.
Topping, K. (2013). Peers as a source of formative and summative assessment. In J. H. Mac Millan (Ed.), SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 395–412). London: Sage.
Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149–169.
van Gennip, N. A., Segers, M. S., & Tillema, H. H. (2009). Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: The influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review, 4(1), 41–54.
Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Van den Berg, 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.
Vögeli-Mantovani, U. (1999). SKBF Trendbericht Nr. 3: Mehr fördern, weniger auslesen. Zur Entwicklung der schulischen Beurteilung in der Schweiz. Aarau: Schweizerische Koordinationsstelle für Bildungsforschung.
Walker, A. (2001). British psychology students’ perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 1(1), 28–36.
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200.
Žlábkova, I., & Rokos, L. (2013). Pohledy na formativní a sumativní hodnocení žáka v českých publikacích [Formative and summative assessment in Czech publications]. Pedagogika, 58(3), 328–354.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Le Hebel, F. et al. (2018). Students’ Perspectives on Peer Assessment. In: Dolin, J., Evans, R. (eds) Transforming Assessment. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63247-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63248-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)