Providing Formative Peer Feedback: What Do We Know?

• In Event: 67.037 - Instructional Feedback: Types, Contexts, and Recommendations

Abstract

Starting from the seminal work of Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner, peers have been conceptualized as potential mediators in students’ learning. One form of involvement is having peers assess and provide feedback to other fellow learners. Through this process, both the assessor and the assessee gain knowledge on the learning task. Our aim will be to explore the key themes that have been empirically investigated in peer feedback research and what is known about them. Five main themes will be discussed.
First, the characteristics of peer feedback. It was found that (a) the quality of peer feedback can be increased via interventions, (b) students are well aware of, and are able to identify, peer feedback of different quality, and (c) peer feedback, although having different characteristics as compared to teacher feedback, can be of high quality, but other factors (such as domain knowledge) can influence the quality.
Second, the characteristics of instruction. Two lines of research have explored how we can promote peer feedback through instructional support: scaffolding and practice/training. Regarding the use of scaffolds, there seems to be mixed results, with researchers suggesting different reasons for the non-significant impact, such as lack of time or practice effect for all conditions, neutralizing the effects of the intervention. Nevertheless, the use of scaffolds to help provide better peer feedback, when the implementation conditions are optimal, enhance peer feedback quality and, thus, students’ performance. Regarding the effect of practice and training, the analyzed studies suggested that training has a positive effect on the quality of the peer feedback and student achievement.
Third, individual characteristics. It was found that domain knowledge has a positive influence on students’ peer feedback quality; a key finding that would run against asking the students to peer-assess novel activities. Also, more research is needed in terms of peer feedback effects on emotions and motivation. A conclusion from the few studies available is that the peer assessment agents’ interactions are complex and influenced by the feedback content, the role (assessor or assessee), classroom climate and interpersonal variables.
Fourth, social and interpersonal variables. Despite the availability of studies that investigated social aspects (e.g., trust) and anonymity this is still an understudied area in peer feedback research. It was found, based on a recent review, that formative approaches to peer assessment that focused on providing informative feedback rather than a score might have better interpersonal effects and seem to be better received by the students. This represents an argument in favor of peer feedback and formative peer assessment rather than peer scoring.
Fifth, effects of peer feedback on achievement. A limited number of studies has explored this topic and the results are mixed. The main conclusion is that peer feedback can have a positive effect on achievement amplified by practicing peer feedback provision and interventions that are adequately implemented.

Authors

• Ernesto Panadero, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

• Anders Jonsson

• Maryam Alqassab, LMU Munich