HKBU Peer Feedback May 2017

Click here to load reader

  • date post

    23-Jan-2018
  • Category

    Education

  • view

    284
  • download

    2

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of HKBU Peer Feedback May 2017

  • Making peer feedback work

    David CarlessTalk at HKBU, May 8, 2017

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Overview

    1. Key feedback concepts

    2. Peer feedback rationales

    3. Our recent relevant research

    4. Challenges & Implications

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Aim of talk To discuss how peer feedback might be implemented effectively

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Are you A peer feedback enthusiast?

    An occasional implementer?

    Someone who hasnt yet tried peer feedback?

    The University of Hong Kong

  • KEY FEEDBACK CONCEPTS

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Wider feedback issuesFeedback as assessment design issue

    Feedback as pedagogic issue

    Feedback as relational issue

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Dialogic feedback Feedback needs to generate dialogue (especially with self or peers)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Key aim of feedback

    To enhance student ability to self-monitor their work in progress

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Sustainable feedback Students generating & using feedback from peers, self (or teachers) as part of self-regulated learning

    (Carless et al., 2011)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • DEFINING PEER FEEDBACK

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong

  • Defining peer feedback (PF) A communication process through which learners enter into dialogues related to performance & standards (Liu & Carless, 2006, p. 280)

    peer review: (Nicol et al., 2014)peer response: (Liu & Hansen, 2002)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • A key pointLearners often gain more from composing PF than from receiving it

    (Lundstrom & Baker, 2009; Nicol et al., 2014; Yu & Lee, 2015)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • RATIONALE FOR PEER FEEDBACK

    The University of Hong Kong

  • General rationale Feedback processes should encourage

    student dialogue Feedback needs to be sustainable

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Specific Rationale Involve students in dialogue around the quality of work

    Help students to reflect onown performance

    Potentially timely & sustainable

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Technology-enabled PFLMS

    PeerMark

    Web 2.0

    The University of Hong Kong

  • FOUR KEY STUDIES

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong

  • 1. To give is better than to receive

    Students taught to give PF improved writing more than students taught to use PF

    Explanation: You review in your own ZPD but may not receive in your ZPD

    (Lundstrom & Baker, 2009)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong

  • 2. Higher order thinking Composing PF is cognitively engaging:- Applying criteria- Diagnosing problems- Suggesting solutions

    (Nicol et al., 2014)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong

  • 3. Varying response to PFNot all students buy in to PF Gains from reading others texts

    Passive involvement

    (Yu & Lee, 2015)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong

  • 4. Modelling & training2 hours of modelling global peer feedback processes+30 minute feedback on peer feedback individual tutorial

    (Min, 2006)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • OUR RECENT RESEARCH

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Qiyun Zhu (Judy) The University of Hong Kong

  • ContextYear 1 university EFL class

    200 students, 5 teachers

    Peer review of writing

    Sustained observations, interviews

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Preparation No or minimal training

    PF sheet / guiding questions

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Selected positive findings Written peer feedback then oral dialogue

    Timeliness, immediacy, negotiation

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Selected negative findings Partner not enthusiastic, perfunctory Comments were vague & general

    Teacher should provide more guidance

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Implications Importance of dialogue between peers

    Scaffolding by teacher

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Yueting Xu (Tracey) The University of Hong Kong

  • ContextYear 1 university EFL class

    57 students, 1 excellent teacher

    PF on oral presentations

    Sustained observations, interviews

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Preparation PF & wider aims of university study

    Discussed video of OP

    Introduced criteria, esp. content

    Modelled giving PF

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Positive findingsStudents more engaged

    Enhanced audience awareness

    Focused on content

    Facilitates teacher feedback on PF

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Challenges Reticence & uncertainty at outset

    Comments inaudible or difficult to understand

    Not easy to get students to be critical

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Implications Only true friends could be cruelly honest Need for both cognitive scaffolding &

    social-affective support

    (Xu & Carless, 2016)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • PEER FEEDBACK CHALLENGES

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Discussion

    In your opinion, what are the main challenges in carrying out PF? How might they be tackled?

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Main challenges Students dont take it seriously

    Poor quality PF

    Students prefer teacher feedback

    Lack of teacher assessment & feedback literacy

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Implications The University of Hong Kong

  • Communication

    Rationales

    The University of Hong Kong

    Potential benefits

    Processes

    Tackling challenges

  • The role of trust Feedback is a social and relational act: importance of trust (Carless, 2013)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Recommended PF practice Sell rationale & benefits to students

    Communicate gains for giver

    Provide training, modeling & support

    Encourage collaborative climate

    The University of Hong Kong

  • ReferencesCarless, D. (2013). Trust and its role in facilitating dialogic feedback. In D. Boud & L. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in Higher

    and Professional Education: Understanding it and doing it well (pp. 90-103). London: Routledge.Carless, D. (2015a). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6), 963-976.Carless, D. (2015b). Excellence in University Assessment: learning from award-winning teachers. London: Routledge. Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher

    Education, 36 (4) 395-407.Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Michigan: University of

    Michigan Press.Liu, N.F. & Carless, D. (2006) Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment, Teaching in Higher Education,

    11 (3), 279-290.Lundstrom, K., & Baker, K. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewers

    own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.Min, H.T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students revision types and writing quality. Journal of

    Second Language Writing, 15, 118-141.Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review

    perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102122. Xu, Y. & Carless, D. (2016). Only true friends could be cruelly honest: cognitive scaffolding and social-affective

    support in teacher feedback literacy, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2016.1226759.Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2015). Understanding EFL students participation in group peer feedback of L2 writing: A case

    study from an activity theory perspective. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 572-593.

    The University of Hong Kong

  • QUESTIONSCOMMENTS

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Less can be More

    Information Action

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Closing feedback loops

    Its only feedback if students take some action

    The University of Hong Kong

  • Sustainable feedback definedActive student participation in dialogic activities in which students generate and use feedback from peers, self or others as part of an ongoing process of developing capacities as autonomous self-regulating learners (Carless, 2013b)

    The University of Hong Kong

  • The University of Hong Kong