The Power of Peer Learning : Fostering Students' Learning Processes and Outcomes.

By: Noroozi, OmidContributor(s): De Wever, BramMaterial type: TextTextSeries: Social Interaction in Learning and Development SeriesPublisher: Cham : Springer International Publishing AG, 2023Copyright date: �2023Edition: 1st edDescription: 1 online resource (394 pages)Content type: text Media type: computer Carrier type: online resourceISBN: 9783031294112Genre/Form: Electronic books.Additional physical formats: Print version:: The Power of Peer LearningLOC classification: LB1049Online resources: Click to View
Contents:
Intro -- Series Editors' Preface -- Peer Learning as a Powerful Tool for  Feedback and Assessment Between Students -- Preface -- Contents -- About the Editors -- Part IConceptual Contributions on Peer Learning -- 1 The Four Pillars of Peer Assessment for Collaborative Teamwork in Higher Education -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Impediments and Solutions for CTW -- 1.2.1 Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Impediments -- 1.2.2 Strategies to Overcome CTW Impediments -- 1.3 Peer Assessment Challenges in CTW Context -- 1.3.1 Quality and Standards -- 1.3.2 Validity and Reliability -- 1.3.3 Scalability and Sustainability -- 1.3.4 Assessment and Feedback Literacy -- 1.4 Framework Development -- 1.4.1 Design -- 1.4.2 Implementation -- 1.4.3 Technology -- 1.4.4 Roles and Responsibilities -- 1.5 Discussion -- 1.5.1 Usage of the Framework -- 1.5.2 Limitations -- 1.5.3 Further Research -- 1.6 Conclusion -- References -- 2 Learning Analytics for Peer Assessment: A Scoping Review -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Purpose of the Present Study -- 2.3 Methodology -- 2.3.1 Scoping Review -- 2.3.2 Search -- 2.4 Results -- 2.5 Discussions and Conclusions -- References -- 3 Support Student Integration of Multiple Peer Feedback on Research Writing in Thesis Circles -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.1.1 Student Peer Review and Feedback in Thesis Circles -- 3.1.2 Multiple Peer Feedback and the Need for Student Support -- 3.1.3 Students Need Support on Assessing Feedback Quality -- 3.1.4 Students Need Support on Integrating Multiple Feedback -- 3.1.5 Integrating Multiple Peer Feedback: Developing Instructional Design for a Complex Student Activity -- 3.2 Methodology -- 3.2.1 Complexities and Challenges of Multiple Peer Feedback Practices -- 3.2.2 Design Hypothesis -- 3.3 Instructional Design -- 3.3.1 Embodiment -- 3.3.2 Mediating Processes -- 3.4 Outcomes -- 3.5 Conclusion.
Appendix: Steps in Student Feedback Dialogue -- References -- Part IIMethodological Contributions on Peer Learning -- 4 Peer Assessment Using Criteria or Comparative Judgement? A Replication Study on the Learning Effect of Two Peer Assessment Methods -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Theoretical Framework -- 4.2.1 Quality of Peer Feedback -- 4.2.2 Peer Assessment Using Criteria -- 4.2.3 Peer Assessment Using Comparative Judgement -- 4.3 This Study -- 4.4 Method -- 4.4.1 Samples -- 4.4.2 Design and Instruments -- 4.4.3 Variables -- 4.4.4 Analyses -- 4.5 Results -- 4.5.1 Quality of Feedback -- 4.5.2 Effect on Performance -- 4.6 Discussion -- Appendix -- References -- 5 Using Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models to Explain Collaboration Intentionality as a Prerequisite for Peer Feedback and Learning in Networks -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Introducing Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models -- 5.3 Illustration of Peer Feedback in Higher Education -- 5.3.1 Variables -- 5.3.2 Specifying Effects to Be Included in the SAOM -- 5.3.3 RSiena Findings -- 5.4 Discussion and Outlook -- References -- 6 Comparing Expert and Peer Assessment of Pedagogical Design in Integrated STEAM Education -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Methods -- 6.2.1 Participants -- 6.2.2 Procedure -- 6.2.3 Data Sources and Coding -- 6.2.4 Statistical Analyses -- 6.3 Results -- 6.3.1 Pre-service Teacher Responsiveness to Expert Assessment -- 6.3.2 Validity and Reliability of Peer Assessment -- 6.3.3 Comparison Between Expert and Peer Feedback -- 6.3.4 Selection of Pedagogical Scenarios by Peer Assessees for Developing a Lesson Plan in Integrated STEAM Education -- 6.4 Discussion -- References -- Part IIITechnological Contributions on Peer Learning -- 7 Constructing Computer-Mediated Feedback in Virtual Reality for Improving Peer Learning: A Synthesis of the Literature in Presentation Research -- 7.1 Introduction.
7.2 The Role of Peer Feedback in Presentation Research -- 7.3 The Differential Effectiveness of Feedback Sources -- 7.4 Quality Criteria for Developing Effective Feedback Messages -- 7.5 Virtual Reality as an Alternative Feedback Source for Peer Learning -- 7.6 Two Recent VR Experiments: Students' Perceptions on Computer-Mediated Feedback -- 7.7 A Future Research Agenda on Computer-Mediated Feedback for Peer Learning in Presentation Research -- References -- 8 Web-Based Peer Assessment Platforms: What Educational Features Influence Learning, Feedback and Social Interaction? -- 8.1 Introduction -- 8.1.1 Web-Based Peer Assessment Platforms -- 8.1.2 Peer Assessment Design Elements Framework -- 8.1.3 Search, Screening and Access to the Platforms, and Review Criteria -- 8.2 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Student Learning -- 8.2.1 Intended Learning Outcomes for Students -- 8.2.2 Link to Self-assessment -- 8.2.3 Calibration and Task Scaffolding -- 8.3 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Feedback -- 8.3.1 Feedback Information Type -- 8.3.2 Feedback Utilization -- 8.3.3 Feedback Moderation -- 8.4 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Social Interactions -- 8.4.1 Anonymity -- 8.4.2 Peer Configuration -- 8.4.3 Peer Matching -- 8.5 Conclusions -- References -- 9 Feed-Back About the Collaboration Process from a Group Awareness Tool. Potential Boundary Conditions for Effective Regulation -- 9.1 Introduction -- 9.2 Supporting Collaboration with Group Awareness Tools -- 9.2.1 Feed-Back on Interaction: How Group Awareness Tools Guide Collaboration -- 9.2.2 Prior Research on Social Group Awareness Tools -- 9.3 Our Research: Scaffolding Collaborative Reflection and Using Self-reports to Assess Participation -- 9.4 Field Study 1: Collaborative Reflection to Scaffold Feed-Up, Feed-Back, and Feed-Forward.
9.4.1 Sample, Materials, Procedure, Measures -- 9.4.2 Results -- 9.5 Field Study 2: Contrasting System-Generated Feed-Back and Peer-Generated Feed-Back -- 9.5.1 Using Peer-Generated Feed-Back to Include a More Holistic Operationalization of Participation -- 9.5.2 Sample, Procedure, and Materials -- 9.5.3 Results -- 9.6 Discussion: What Are Boundary Conditions for the Effective Use of Feed-Back Regarding Collaboration? -- 9.6.1 Phases 1 and 2: Collecting and Aggregating Data -- 9.6.2 Phase 3: Taking up Feed-Back and Comparing It to a Desired State -- 9.6.3 Phase 4: Regulating the Collaboration -- 9.7 Conclusion -- References -- 10 Viewbrics: A Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment Method to Mirror and Master Complex Skills with Video-Enhanced Rubrics and Peer Feedback in Secondary Education -- 10.1 Introduction and Background -- 10.1.1 The Acquisition of Complex Skills, Formative Assessment and (Video-Enhanced) Rubrics -- 10.1.2 Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment: Process Support for Goal Setting, Practice, Feedback, Reflection and Self-regulation -- 10.1.3 The Objectives and Outline of the Viewbrics Project -- 10.1.4 The Designed Intervention: The Viewbrics Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment Method -- 10.2 Method -- 10.2.1 Sample -- 10.2.2 Instruments -- 10.3 Results -- 10.4 Discussion -- 10.4.1 Implications for Practice -- 10.5 Conclusion -- References -- Part IVEmpirical Contributions on Peer Learning -- 11 PeerTeach: Teaching Learners to Do Learner-Centered Teaching -- 11.1 Introduction: Prior Studies, Research Questions, and Significance -- 11.2 Prescriptive Intervention Design to Promote Three Learner-Centered Tutoring Strategies -- 11.2.1 Design -- 11.3 Constructivist Intervention Design to Unearth Learner-Centered Tutoring Strategies -- 11.3.1 Design -- 11.4 Methods -- 11.4.1 Round One Implementation Sequence.
11.4.2 Round Two Implementation Sequence -- 11.4.3 Measures -- 11.5 Results -- 11.5.1 Students Default to Didactic Teaching Online, but Shift with Training -- 11.5.2 Learning Gains in Round 1 of Data Collection -- 11.5.3 Round Two: Peer Instructional Behaviors Shift to Make Room for Peers to Think -- 11.5.4 Tutoring Improves with Training and Content Mastery -- 11.5.5 Combining Data from Both Studies Highlights Need for Mastery and Training -- 11.6 Discussion -- 11.7 Limitations -- 11.8 Conclusion -- Appendix A: Rubric for Study 1 and 2 Post-assessment -- Appendix B: Frequency of "Most Helpful" Teaching Moves as Recalled by Tutee -- References -- 12 A Thematic Analysis of Factors Influencing Student's Peer-Feedback Orientation -- 12.1 Introduction -- 12.2 Research Design and Method -- 12.3 Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis -- 12.3.1 Participants -- 12.4 Data Analysis -- 12.5 Findings -- 12.5.1 Utility -- 12.5.2 Accountability -- 12.5.3 Social Awareness -- 12.5.4 Self-efficacy -- 12.6 Discussion and Conclusion -- 12.6.1 Discussion -- 12.7 Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Future Research -- 12.8 Conclusions -- Appendix A -- Appendix B -- Appendix C -- Appendix D -- References -- 13 Giving Feedback to Peers in an Online Inquiry-Learning Environment -- 13.1 Introduction -- 13.1.1 Design of the Studies Conducted -- 13.1.2 Participants -- 13.1.3 Design and Procedure -- 13.1.4 Results and Recommendations for Practice -- 13.1.5 The Role of Assessment Criteria -- 13.1.6 The Role of the Quality and Type of Reviewed Products -- 13.1.7 The Way of Giving Feedback -- 13.2 Conclusion -- References -- 14 Peer Interaction Types for Social and Academic Integration and Institutional Attachment in First Year Undergraduates -- 14.1 Introduction -- 14.2 Previous Research -- 14.3 Method -- 14.3.1 Design -- 14.3.2 Sample -- 14.3.3 Measures.
14.3.4 Analysis.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
No physical items for this record

Intro -- Series Editors' Preface -- Peer Learning as a Powerful Tool for  Feedback and Assessment Between Students -- Preface -- Contents -- About the Editors -- Part IConceptual Contributions on Peer Learning -- 1 The Four Pillars of Peer Assessment for Collaborative Teamwork in Higher Education -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Impediments and Solutions for CTW -- 1.2.1 Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Impediments -- 1.2.2 Strategies to Overcome CTW Impediments -- 1.3 Peer Assessment Challenges in CTW Context -- 1.3.1 Quality and Standards -- 1.3.2 Validity and Reliability -- 1.3.3 Scalability and Sustainability -- 1.3.4 Assessment and Feedback Literacy -- 1.4 Framework Development -- 1.4.1 Design -- 1.4.2 Implementation -- 1.4.3 Technology -- 1.4.4 Roles and Responsibilities -- 1.5 Discussion -- 1.5.1 Usage of the Framework -- 1.5.2 Limitations -- 1.5.3 Further Research -- 1.6 Conclusion -- References -- 2 Learning Analytics for Peer Assessment: A Scoping Review -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Purpose of the Present Study -- 2.3 Methodology -- 2.3.1 Scoping Review -- 2.3.2 Search -- 2.4 Results -- 2.5 Discussions and Conclusions -- References -- 3 Support Student Integration of Multiple Peer Feedback on Research Writing in Thesis Circles -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.1.1 Student Peer Review and Feedback in Thesis Circles -- 3.1.2 Multiple Peer Feedback and the Need for Student Support -- 3.1.3 Students Need Support on Assessing Feedback Quality -- 3.1.4 Students Need Support on Integrating Multiple Feedback -- 3.1.5 Integrating Multiple Peer Feedback: Developing Instructional Design for a Complex Student Activity -- 3.2 Methodology -- 3.2.1 Complexities and Challenges of Multiple Peer Feedback Practices -- 3.2.2 Design Hypothesis -- 3.3 Instructional Design -- 3.3.1 Embodiment -- 3.3.2 Mediating Processes -- 3.4 Outcomes -- 3.5 Conclusion.

Appendix: Steps in Student Feedback Dialogue -- References -- Part IIMethodological Contributions on Peer Learning -- 4 Peer Assessment Using Criteria or Comparative Judgement? A Replication Study on the Learning Effect of Two Peer Assessment Methods -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Theoretical Framework -- 4.2.1 Quality of Peer Feedback -- 4.2.2 Peer Assessment Using Criteria -- 4.2.3 Peer Assessment Using Comparative Judgement -- 4.3 This Study -- 4.4 Method -- 4.4.1 Samples -- 4.4.2 Design and Instruments -- 4.4.3 Variables -- 4.4.4 Analyses -- 4.5 Results -- 4.5.1 Quality of Feedback -- 4.5.2 Effect on Performance -- 4.6 Discussion -- Appendix -- References -- 5 Using Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models to Explain Collaboration Intentionality as a Prerequisite for Peer Feedback and Learning in Networks -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Introducing Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models -- 5.3 Illustration of Peer Feedback in Higher Education -- 5.3.1 Variables -- 5.3.2 Specifying Effects to Be Included in the SAOM -- 5.3.3 RSiena Findings -- 5.4 Discussion and Outlook -- References -- 6 Comparing Expert and Peer Assessment of Pedagogical Design in Integrated STEAM Education -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Methods -- 6.2.1 Participants -- 6.2.2 Procedure -- 6.2.3 Data Sources and Coding -- 6.2.4 Statistical Analyses -- 6.3 Results -- 6.3.1 Pre-service Teacher Responsiveness to Expert Assessment -- 6.3.2 Validity and Reliability of Peer Assessment -- 6.3.3 Comparison Between Expert and Peer Feedback -- 6.3.4 Selection of Pedagogical Scenarios by Peer Assessees for Developing a Lesson Plan in Integrated STEAM Education -- 6.4 Discussion -- References -- Part IIITechnological Contributions on Peer Learning -- 7 Constructing Computer-Mediated Feedback in Virtual Reality for Improving Peer Learning: A Synthesis of the Literature in Presentation Research -- 7.1 Introduction.

7.2 The Role of Peer Feedback in Presentation Research -- 7.3 The Differential Effectiveness of Feedback Sources -- 7.4 Quality Criteria for Developing Effective Feedback Messages -- 7.5 Virtual Reality as an Alternative Feedback Source for Peer Learning -- 7.6 Two Recent VR Experiments: Students' Perceptions on Computer-Mediated Feedback -- 7.7 A Future Research Agenda on Computer-Mediated Feedback for Peer Learning in Presentation Research -- References -- 8 Web-Based Peer Assessment Platforms: What Educational Features Influence Learning, Feedback and Social Interaction? -- 8.1 Introduction -- 8.1.1 Web-Based Peer Assessment Platforms -- 8.1.2 Peer Assessment Design Elements Framework -- 8.1.3 Search, Screening and Access to the Platforms, and Review Criteria -- 8.2 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Student Learning -- 8.2.1 Intended Learning Outcomes for Students -- 8.2.2 Link to Self-assessment -- 8.2.3 Calibration and Task Scaffolding -- 8.3 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Feedback -- 8.3.1 Feedback Information Type -- 8.3.2 Feedback Utilization -- 8.3.3 Feedback Moderation -- 8.4 Web-Based Peer Assessment Features Influencing Social Interactions -- 8.4.1 Anonymity -- 8.4.2 Peer Configuration -- 8.4.3 Peer Matching -- 8.5 Conclusions -- References -- 9 Feed-Back About the Collaboration Process from a Group Awareness Tool. Potential Boundary Conditions for Effective Regulation -- 9.1 Introduction -- 9.2 Supporting Collaboration with Group Awareness Tools -- 9.2.1 Feed-Back on Interaction: How Group Awareness Tools Guide Collaboration -- 9.2.2 Prior Research on Social Group Awareness Tools -- 9.3 Our Research: Scaffolding Collaborative Reflection and Using Self-reports to Assess Participation -- 9.4 Field Study 1: Collaborative Reflection to Scaffold Feed-Up, Feed-Back, and Feed-Forward.

9.4.1 Sample, Materials, Procedure, Measures -- 9.4.2 Results -- 9.5 Field Study 2: Contrasting System-Generated Feed-Back and Peer-Generated Feed-Back -- 9.5.1 Using Peer-Generated Feed-Back to Include a More Holistic Operationalization of Participation -- 9.5.2 Sample, Procedure, and Materials -- 9.5.3 Results -- 9.6 Discussion: What Are Boundary Conditions for the Effective Use of Feed-Back Regarding Collaboration? -- 9.6.1 Phases 1 and 2: Collecting and Aggregating Data -- 9.6.2 Phase 3: Taking up Feed-Back and Comparing It to a Desired State -- 9.6.3 Phase 4: Regulating the Collaboration -- 9.7 Conclusion -- References -- 10 Viewbrics: A Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment Method to Mirror and Master Complex Skills with Video-Enhanced Rubrics and Peer Feedback in Secondary Education -- 10.1 Introduction and Background -- 10.1.1 The Acquisition of Complex Skills, Formative Assessment and (Video-Enhanced) Rubrics -- 10.1.2 Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment: Process Support for Goal Setting, Practice, Feedback, Reflection and Self-regulation -- 10.1.3 The Objectives and Outline of the Viewbrics Project -- 10.1.4 The Designed Intervention: The Viewbrics Technology-Enhanced Formative Assessment Method -- 10.2 Method -- 10.2.1 Sample -- 10.2.2 Instruments -- 10.3 Results -- 10.4 Discussion -- 10.4.1 Implications for Practice -- 10.5 Conclusion -- References -- Part IVEmpirical Contributions on Peer Learning -- 11 PeerTeach: Teaching Learners to Do Learner-Centered Teaching -- 11.1 Introduction: Prior Studies, Research Questions, and Significance -- 11.2 Prescriptive Intervention Design to Promote Three Learner-Centered Tutoring Strategies -- 11.2.1 Design -- 11.3 Constructivist Intervention Design to Unearth Learner-Centered Tutoring Strategies -- 11.3.1 Design -- 11.4 Methods -- 11.4.1 Round One Implementation Sequence.

11.4.2 Round Two Implementation Sequence -- 11.4.3 Measures -- 11.5 Results -- 11.5.1 Students Default to Didactic Teaching Online, but Shift with Training -- 11.5.2 Learning Gains in Round 1 of Data Collection -- 11.5.3 Round Two: Peer Instructional Behaviors Shift to Make Room for Peers to Think -- 11.5.4 Tutoring Improves with Training and Content Mastery -- 11.5.5 Combining Data from Both Studies Highlights Need for Mastery and Training -- 11.6 Discussion -- 11.7 Limitations -- 11.8 Conclusion -- Appendix A: Rubric for Study 1 and 2 Post-assessment -- Appendix B: Frequency of "Most Helpful" Teaching Moves as Recalled by Tutee -- References -- 12 A Thematic Analysis of Factors Influencing Student's Peer-Feedback Orientation -- 12.1 Introduction -- 12.2 Research Design and Method -- 12.3 Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis -- 12.3.1 Participants -- 12.4 Data Analysis -- 12.5 Findings -- 12.5.1 Utility -- 12.5.2 Accountability -- 12.5.3 Social Awareness -- 12.5.4 Self-efficacy -- 12.6 Discussion and Conclusion -- 12.6.1 Discussion -- 12.7 Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Future Research -- 12.8 Conclusions -- Appendix A -- Appendix B -- Appendix C -- Appendix D -- References -- 13 Giving Feedback to Peers in an Online Inquiry-Learning Environment -- 13.1 Introduction -- 13.1.1 Design of the Studies Conducted -- 13.1.2 Participants -- 13.1.3 Design and Procedure -- 13.1.4 Results and Recommendations for Practice -- 13.1.5 The Role of Assessment Criteria -- 13.1.6 The Role of the Quality and Type of Reviewed Products -- 13.1.7 The Way of Giving Feedback -- 13.2 Conclusion -- References -- 14 Peer Interaction Types for Social and Academic Integration and Institutional Attachment in First Year Undergraduates -- 14.1 Introduction -- 14.2 Previous Research -- 14.3 Method -- 14.3.1 Design -- 14.3.2 Sample -- 14.3.3 Measures.

14.3.4 Analysis.

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, 2023. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.