Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Facilitating Collaborative Learning Through Peer Assessment APP: A Case Study

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Knowledge Building and Regulation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Part of the book series: Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education ((PRRE))

Abstract

It has become common practice to adopt collaborative learning in the field of education. Among different collaborative learning strategies, peer assessment is one of the most effective strategies to improve learning performance and higher order thinking skills. Self-efficacy and motivation are two important dimensions of psychology in peer assessment. This study aims to investigate peer assessment, self-efficacy, and motivation as well as the role of feedback. In total, 48 undergraduates participated in this study and they conducted two-round peer assessments via a developed APP (Application). The results indicated that students with higher intrinsic motivation tended to have higher self-efficacy in peer assessment. Cognitive feedback and concrete suggestions were the most effective for improving learning performance in peer assessment. The implications and limitations of this study can contribute to the implementation of peer assessment in future studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of educational psychology, 80(3), 260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbeite, F. G., & Weiss, E. M. (2004). Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample: Testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2002). Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 497–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloxham, S., & West, A. (2004). Understanding the rules of the game: Making peer assessment as a medium for developing students’ conceptions of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 721–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. C., Tseng, K. H., & Liang, C. (2014). Is reflection performance correlated to the learning effect in a web-based portfolio assessment environment for middle school students?. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(1), 73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao, K. H., Lan, C. H., Kinshuk, D., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2014). Implementation of a mobile peer assessment system with augmented reality in a fundamental design course. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), 6(2), 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). An educational research course facilitated by online peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(1), 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. H., Hou, H. T., & Wu, S. Y. (2014). Exploring students’ emotional responses and participation in an online peer assessment activity: A case study. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(3), 271–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. H., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2015). Examining the role of feedback messages in undergraduate students’ writing performance during an online peer assessment activity. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 78–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Y., & Cho, K. (2010). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 629–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cizek, G. J. (2010). An introduction to formative assessment: History, characteristics, and challenges. In G. J. Cizek & H. L. Andrade (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 3–17). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, K., Blumberg, F., & Auld, D. P. (2010). The relationship between motivation, learning strategies and choice of environment whether traditional or including an online component. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 349–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Grez, L., & Valcke, M. (2013). Student response system and how to make engineering students learn oral presentation skills. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(4), 940–947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franken, R. (2006). In Human motivation (6th ed.). Florence, KY: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harter, S. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: Motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology, 17(3), 300–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsia, L. H., Huang, I. W., & Hwang, G. J. (2015). A web-based peer-assessment approach to improving junior high school students’ performance, self-efficacy and motivation in performing arts courses. British Journal of Educational Technology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12248. Advance online publication.

  • Hsia, L. H., Huang, I., & Hwang, G. J. (2016). Effects of different online peer-feedback approaches on students’ performance skills, motivation and self-efficacy in a dance course. Computers & Education, 96, 55–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joordens, S., Pare, D. E., & Pruesse, K. (2009). peerScholar: An evidence-based online peer assessment tool supporting critical thinking and clear communication. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on e-Learning (pp. 236–240).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagima, L. K., & Hausafus, C. O. (2000). Integration of electronic communication in higher education: Contributions of faculty computer self-efficacy. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, I., Robertson, R. J., Fertman, C. I., Nagle, E. F., McConnaha,W. R., & Rabin, B. S. (2013). Self-efficacy and enjoyment of middle school children performing the progressive aerobic cardiovascular endurance run (PACER). Perceptual & Motor Skills, 117(2), 470–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students’ art design performance using handheld devices. Computers & Education, 85, 149–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., Wang, H. H., & Lee, S. T. (2011). Using reflective peer assessment to promote students’ conceptual understanding through asynchronous discussions. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 178–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(3), 275–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J., & Law, N. (2012). Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback. Instructional Science, 40(2), 257–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, R., McNamara, P. M., & Seery, N. (2012). Promoting deep learning in a teacher education programme through self-and peer-assessment and feedback. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 179–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 30–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: Knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 534–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih, R. C. (2011). Can web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(5), 829–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shih, J. L., Chuang, C. W., & Hwang, G. J. (2010). An inquiry-based mobile learning approach to enhancing social science learning effectiveness. Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 50–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, G. K. (1989). Student peer review in the classroom: a teaching and grading tool. Journal of Agronomic Education, 8(2), 105–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H., Cooper, A., & Lancaster, L. (2002). Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(1), 71–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SÓ§Ó§t, A., & Leijen, A. (2012). Designing support for reflection activities in tertiary dance education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45, 448–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, Y. C., & Chuang, M. T. (2013). Fostering revision of argumentative writing through structured peer assessment. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 116(1), 210–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161–1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Taiwan college students’ self-efficacy and motivation of learning in online peer assessment environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 164–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors of web-student performance: The role of self-efficacy and reasons for taking an on-line class. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 151–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

    Lanqin Zheng

Authors
  1. Lanqin Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lanqin Zheng .

Appendix

Appendix

Questions about peer assessment

  1. 1.

    Overall, what do you think of the peer assessment?

    1. A.

      Very useful

    2. B.

      Useless

  2. 2.

    Which kind of comment is the most useful for improving group products?

    1. A.

      Cognitive comments

    2. B.

      Meta-cognitive comments

    3. C.

      Affective comments

  3. 3.

    Which kind of peer feedback messages are the most useful for improving group products?

    1. A.

      General advice

    2. B.

      Concrete suggestions

    3. C.

      Positive comments or praise

    4. D.

      Negative comments or criticism

    5. E.

      Comments on skills, methods, or strategies

    6. F.

      Comments on reflecting on the group products

  4. 4.

    What have you learned from peer comments?

    1. A.

      Domain knowledge or skills

    2. B.

      Methods or strategies

    3. C.

      Positive feelings

    4. D.

      Be more interested in what I have learned

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zheng, L. (2017). Facilitating Collaborative Learning Through Peer Assessment APP: A Case Study. In: Knowledge Building and Regulation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1972-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1972-2_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-1970-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-1972-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation