Implementing peer feedback

of 54/54
Implementing peer feedback: potentials and challenges David Carless HKU, November 23, 2016 http:// davidcarless.edu.hku.hk/ The University of Hong Kong
  • date post

    13-Jan-2017
  • Category

    Education

  • view

    222
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Implementing peer feedback

  • Implementing peer feedback: potentials and challengesDavid CarlessHKU, November 23, 2016http://davidcarless.edu.hku.hk/

  • OverviewFeedback processesPeer feedback rationalesOur recent research Challenges & Implications

  • Aim of talk To discuss salient issues for effective implementation of peer feedback

    *

  • SITUATING FEEDBACK

  • Learning-oriented assessment framework (Carless, 2015a)

  • Wider feedback issuesFeedback as assessment design issue

    Feedback as pedagogic issue

    Feedback as relational issue

  • Dialogic feedback Feedback needs to generate dialogue

  • Key aim of feedback To enhance student ability to self-monitor their work in progress

    *

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

    (Carless et al., 2011)

  • INTRODUCING PEER FEEDBACK

  • 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)

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

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

  • RATIONALE FOR PEER FEEDBACK

  • General rationaleFeedback processes should encourage student dialogueFeedback needs to be sustainable

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

    Help students to reflect onown performance

    Potentially timely & sustainable

  • Technology-enabled PFLMS

    PeerMark

    Web 2.0

  • FOUR KEY STUDIES

  • 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)

  • 2. Higher order thinkingComposing PF is cognitively engaging:

    Applying criteriaDiagnosing problemsSuggesting solutions

    (Nicol et al., 2014)

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

    Passive involvement

    (Yu & Lee, 2015)

  • 4. Feedback on PFReceivers of PF gave feedback to providers (Kim, 2009)Enhanced motivation & performance

  • OUR RECENT RESEARCH

  • Qiyun Zhu (Judy)

  • ContextYear 1 university EFL class

    200 students, 5 teachers

    Peer review of writing

    Sustained observations, interviews

  • Preparation No or minimal training

    PF sheet / guiding questions

  • Selected positive findingsWritten peer feedback then

    oral dialogue

    Timeliness, immediacy,

    negotiation

  • Selected negative findingsPartner not enthusiastic, perfunctoryComments were vague & general

    Teacher should explain how to complete the feedback form

  • Implications Importance of dialogue between peers

    Role of teacher in PF on writing?

  • Yueting Xu (Tracey)

  • ContextYear 1 university EFL class

    57 students, 1 excellent teacher

    PF on oral presentations

    Sustained observations, interviews

  • Preparation PF & wider aims of university study

    Discussed video of OP

    Introduced criteria, esp. content

    Modelled giving PF

  • Positive findingsStudents more engaged

    Enhanced audience awareness

    Focused on content

    Facilitates teacher feedback on PF

  • ChallengesReticence & uncertainty at outset

    Comments inaudible or difficult to understand

    Not easy to get students to be critical

  • Implications Only true friends could be cruelly honest

    Need for both cognitive scaffolding & social-affective support

    (Xu & Carless, 2016)

  • PEER FEEDBACK CHALLENGES

  • Discussion

    In your view/experience, what are the major challenges in carrying out PF? And how might they be tackled?

  • Main challengesStudents dont take it seriously

    Poor quality PF

    Students prefer teacher feedback

    Lack of teacher assessment &

    feedback literacy

  • Implications

  • CommunicationRationalesPotential benefitsProcessesTackling challenges

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

  • Recommended PF practice Sell rationale & benefits to students

    Communicate gains for giver

    Provide modeling & support

    Encourage collaborative climate

  • 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.Kim, M. (2009). The impact of an elaborated assessees role in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 105-114Liu, 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.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.

  • QUESTIONSCOMMENTS

  • Less can be More Information Action

  • Closing feedback loopsIts only feedback if students take some action

  • 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)

  • Merry, Price, Carless, & Taras (2013)

  • *

    *