peer feedback dialogues
Embed Size (px)
TRANSCRIPT

Developing dialogic feedback processes through
peer reviewProfessor David Carless
Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
13th October, 2016
The University of Hong Kong

Overview
1. Key feedback processes & issues
2. Peer feedback rationale
3. Select literature review
4. Our recent research
5. Challenges & Implications
The University of Hong Kong

Marking overload
The University of Hong Kong

Aim of talk
To discuss salient issues for effective implementation of peer feedback
The University of Hong Kong

My definition of feedback
“A dialogic process in which learners make sense of information from varied sources and use it to enhance the quality of their work or learning strategies”.
Carless (2015a, p.192)
The University of Hong Kong


Defining peer feedback (PF) An arrangement whereby students evaluate and make judgments about the work of their peers (Nicol et al., 2014, p. 104)(peer review)
(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

SITUATING FEEDBACK & PEER FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

The University of Hong Kong
Productive assessment task design
Understanding quality in the discipline
Student engagement with feedback
Learning-oriented assessment framework (Carless, 2015b)

Bigger pictureFeedback as assessment design issue
Feedback as a pedagogical issue
Feedback as a relational issue
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

Less can be More
The University of Hong Kong

RATIONALE FOR PEER FEEDBACK + FOUR KEY STUDIES
The University of Hong Kong

Rationale Involve students in dialogue around the quality of work
Help students to reflect onown performance
Potentially plentiful & timely
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
You review in your own ZPD but you may not receive in your ZPD
Lundstrom & Baker, 2009*
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

3. Varying motives for PFNot all students buy in to PF Gains from reading others’ texts
Passive involvement
Yu & Lee, 2015*
The University of Hong Kong

4. Feedback on PF• Receivers of PF gave feedback to
providers (Kim, 2009)• Enhanced motivation & performance
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
• “I realised it’s not that my idea was wrong but I didn’t express it clearly”
The University of Hong Kong

Selected negative findings• Partner not enthusiastic, perfunctory• Comments were vague & general
• The teacher should have explained how to complete the form
• What does the teacher think about our peer feedback?
The University of Hong Kong

Implications • Importance of interaction between peers
• PF as preparation for feedback from 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 • Positioned PF within wider goals of
university study• Discussed video of OP in class• Introduced assessment criteria, including
content, audience awareness, pacing etc• Modelled how to give PF
The University of Hong Kong

Positive findingsStudents more engaged
Enhanced audience awareness
Focused on content
Enables 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 • Interplay between cognitive scaffolding &
social-affective support• Teacher feedback literacy to support
development of student feedback literacy(Xu & Carless, 2016)
The University of Hong Kong

PEER FEEDBACK CHALLENGES
The University of Hong Kong

Discussion
In your view/experience, what are the major challenges in carrying out PF?
The University of Hong Kong

Negative experiences• Students don’t take it seriously
• Poor quality PF
• Students prefer teacher feedback
Lack of teacher assessment & feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong

Conclusions The University of Hong Kong

Communication
Rationales
The University of Hong Kong
Potential benefits
Processes
Tackling challenges

Good PF practice• Sell rationale to students
• Communicate gains for ‘giver’
• Provide some training & support
The University of Hong Kong

Feedback literacy• Need for further development of teacher
assessment & feedback literacy …
• … seeding student assessment & feedback literacy
(Xu & Brown, 2016) (Xu & Carless, 2016)
The University of Hong Kong

ReferencesCarless, D. (2015a). Excellence in University Assessment: learning from award-winning teachers. London: Routledge. Carless, D. (2015b). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6), 963-976.Kim, M. (2009). The impact of an elaborated assessee’s 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.Lundstrom, K., & Baker, K. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s
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), 102–122. Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 58, 149-162. 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

THANK YOU
The University of Hong Kong

The University of Hong Kong