Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments
By Jan-Willem Strijbos, Dominique Sluijsmans. 2010
223 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Education
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb3eedc899a1b40bd52db75542f4c133344e11db
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
- Melissa Patchan
- Ernesto Panadero
- Christian D. Schunn
- Tammy Schellens
- Tijs Rotsaert
- Nadira Saab
- J. V. van Driel
- P. W. van den Broek
Citations in the corpus
- The impact of formative peer feedback on higher education students’ academic writing: a Meta-Analysis (2018, background): “Therefore, the authors cautioned that the share of (quasi)experimental studies was small and stressed the need for more controlled studies with specific variable descriptions (see also Topping 1998, 2010; Strijbos and Sluijsmans 2010).”
- Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective (2010, background): “…phenomenon of peer assessment and (b) a lack of a commonly agreed-upon process model of what overt processes constitute peer assessment and what cognitive and discursive processes are associated with these overt activities (cf. the ‘‘need for functional development’’; Strijbos & Sluijsmans, 2010).”
- Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: how students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality (2015, background): “One major limitation of the research to date is that there are few empirical studies that have systematically examined the mechanisms of peer assessment—that is, what factors mediate learning (Strijbos and Sluijsmans 2010).”
- 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): “However, it cannot be expected that every student will offer high-quality feedback because this requires high-level cognitive processing (Strijbos et al. 2010); students need to be capable of dealing with specific assessment criteria to judge a peer’s performance (Gielen and De Wever 2015).”