Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning?

By Philip Vickerman. 2009

252 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/423a9d1b17991bc47c0123b1a1c0b817966fd389

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Feedback on feedback practice: perceptions of students and academics (2017, unknown): “While many researchers advocate the use of peer assessment (Nicol and MacfarlaneDick 2006; Topping 2010; Vickerman 2009), the results of this study presented more negative views in terms of the effectiveness of group and peer feedback: 56% students and 46% staff felt that peer evaluation or…”
Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation (2014, background): “For example, while some students find peer review to be a positive learning experience (see, for example, Moore and Teather, 2013; Vickerman, 2009), others may be reluctant to evaluate another student’s work because of concerns relating to validity, reliability, bias and fairness.”
How does student peer review influence perceptions, engagement and academic outcomes? A case study (2014, background): “…is now a large body of literature on student perspectives of peer review (for example, Dochy, Segers, and Sluijsmans 1999; Hansen and Liu 2005; Vickerman 2009) and the potential benefits of peer review to students (Topping 1998; Paulus 1999; van den Berg, Admiraal, and Pilot 2006; Lundstrom…”
Assessment revisited: a review of research in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education (2016, background): “Although it is a positive experience for students, when teachers are constructing strategies for formative peer-assessment, they should be aware of different learning styles in order to develop opportunities for students to learn and assess (Vickerman 2009).”
Is peer review an appropriate form of assessment in a MOOC? Student participation and performance in formative peer review (2017, result): “This is consistent with the mixed student perceptions of peer review found in the literature (Hanrahan and isaacs 2001; vickerman 2009).”
Business graduate performance in oral communication skills and strategies for improvement (2014, unknown): “argument to introduce, or extend, peer feedback exercises within degree curricula, encouraging lifelong learning (Vickerman, 2009).”
Student perceptions of peer assessment: an interdisciplinary study (2014, methodology): “Dedicating more time to agreeing on and understanding the rubrics, grade descriptors and scoring matrix prior to the assessment process (Miller 2003; Vickerman 2009).”
Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills (2018, background): “The existing research suggests that retaining anonymity for assessors is one of several factors that encourages student participation (Ballantyne et al. 2002; Vickerman 2009).”
The impact of supplemental instruction on learning competence and academic performance (2010, background): “Social constructivist educators (see Downing 2001) view learning as an active process where learners should learn to discover principles, concepts and facts for themselves (Roscoe and Chi 2007; Vickerman 2009).”
Students’ views of assessment in project-led engineering education: findings from a case study in Portugal (2012, background): “Besides this, it also encourages the development of student autonomy and higher‐order thinking skills (van den Berg 2006 ), fostered by self‐reflection and metacognition processes, with positive implications for student self‐regulation and improvement of learning (Zimmerman 1990 ; Vickerman 2009 ”
Does the use of summative peer assessment in collaborative group work inhibit good judgement? (2018, background): “Vickerman (2009) suggests anonymous marking to enhance accuracy, as students can be assured they will not be identified when indicating peers’ underperformance.”