EARLI 2021
moimo828
Created on August 9, 2021
Over 30 million people build interactive content in Genially.
Check out what others have designed:
LET’S GO TO LONDON!
Personalized
SLYCE DECK
Personalized
ENERGY KEY ACHIEVEMENTS
Personalized
CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ART KEY ACHIEVEMENTS
Personalized
ABOUT THE EEA GRANTS AND NORWAY
Personalized
DOWNFALLL OF ARAB RULE IN AL-ANDALUS
Personalized
HUMAN AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT KEY
Personalized
Transcript
Can students feel confident and safe? The impact of training targeting the social nature of peer feedback
EARLI 2021
Morgane Senden, Dominique De Jaeger & Liesje Coertjens
Theoritical framework
Peer feedback is a social activity
Li (2017), van Gennip et al. (2009)
positive impact (collaborative learning)
negative impact (e.g. feeling of uncomfort, lack of trust...)
How to enhance the interpersonal climate? Training targeting the social nature of peer feedback (and more specifically trust and psychological safety)
Does the addition of a training session targeting the social nature of peer feedback
- have a positive impact on student perceptions?
- have a positive impact on student performance?
Research questions
3. prompt students to give feedback of higher quality to their peers?
77 third-year students in physical education
Analysis of written feedback
Feedback example: "I find the diagram clear, the addition of images allows to see clearly which material is used even if the contrast with the gymnast is a little bit special. In my opinion on the video the criterion of not bending the back is not respected. It might have been relevant to specify in the instructions how to direct the look. Good work overall."First step: division in unite of meaning (Strijbos et al., 2006)Second step: classification of each unite of meaning
- According to the assessment criteria
- According to the distinction between verification and elaboration feedback (Shute, 2008; Alqassab et al., 2018)
Analysis of written feedback – Example student 1
Results – Impact on feedback quality
Verification feedback
Elaboration feedback
50%
Experimental group
40%
30%
70%
80%
90%
100%
20%
10 %
0%
Residuals analysis
χ² Test
Cramer's V = 0.0998
No difference in the qualitySignificant difference in the presence of feedback, which could be explain by the fact that student perform better in the control group
Absence of feedback
Control group
40%
41%
29%
30%
Type of feedback given in each group
36%
24%
60%
> 0.20 = Small 0.20 - 0.40 = Medium < 0.40 = Large
Preliminary results :
- Significant difference on the absence/presence of feedback (impact of training or of the difference of performance?)
- No impact on the level of quality (verification/elaboration)
- on the training session
- on student well-being (stress, depression, loneliness, lack of motivation, difficulty focusing on schoolwork...)
Discussion
De Man et al. (2021), Deng et al. (2021), Birmingham et al. (2021)
Bibliography
Alqassab, M., Strijbos, J., & Ufer, S. (2018). The impact of peer solution quality on peer-feedback provision on geometry proofs: Evidence from eye-movement analysis. Learning and Instruction, 58, 182-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.003Birmingham, W., Wadsworth, L., Lassetter, J., Graff, T., Lauren, E. & Hugh, M. (20214). COVID-19 lockdown: Impact on college students' lives. Journal of American College Health, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2021.1909041De Man, J., Buffel, V., van de Velde, S., Bracke, P., Van Hal, G. F., Wouters, E., Gadeyne, S., Kindermans, H. P. J., Joos, M., Vanmaercke, S., van Studenten, V. V., Nyssen, A., Puttaert, N., Vervecken, D., Van Guyse, M., & Belgian COVID-19 International Student Well-being Study (C19 ISWS) team. (2021). Disentangling depression in belgian higher education students amidst the first COVID-19 lockdown (april-may 2020). Archives of Public Health 79(1), 3-3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-020-00522-yDeng, J., Zhou, F., Hou, W., Silver, Z., Wong, C. Y., Chang, O., Drakos, A., Zuo, Q. K., & Huang, E. (2021). The prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and sleep disturbance in higher education students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 301, 113863-113863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113863Li, L. (2017). The role of anonymity in peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 645-656. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1174766 Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795Strijbos, J., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers and Education, 46(1), 29-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002van Gennip, N. A. E., Segers, M. S. R., & Tillema, H. H. (2009). Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: The influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review, 4(1), 41-54. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2008.11.002