The role of training in improving peer assessment skills amongst year six pupils in primary school writing: an action research enquiry

References

• Altrichter, H., P. Posch, and B. Somekh. 1993. Teachers Investigate Their Work: An Introduction to the Methods of Action Research. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, E. C. 1999. “The Effects of Trained Peer Response on ESL Students’ Revision Types and Writing Quality.” Journal of Second Language Writing 8 (3): 215–241. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80115-5
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., C. Harrison, C. Lee, B. Marshall, and D. Wiliam. 2003. Assessment for Learning: Putting it into Practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., and D. Wiliam. 1998. “Assessment and Classroom Learning.” Assessment in Education 5 (1): 7–74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102
   Google Scholar
• Bloxham, S., and A. West. 2004. “Understanding the Rules of the Game: Marking Peer Assessment as a Medium for Developing Students’ Conceptions of Assessment.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29 (6): 721–733. doi: 10.1080/0260293042000227254
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Budd, J. W. 2004. “Mind Maps as Classroom Exercises.” Journal of Economic Education 35 (1): 35–46. doi: 10.3200/JECE.35.1.35-46
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess-Allen, J., and V. Owen-Smith. 2010. “Using Mind Mapping in Analysis of Qualitative Data.” Health Expectations 13 (4): 406–415. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00594.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler-Kisber, L., and T. Poldma. 2009. “The Power of Visual Approaches in Qualitative Inquiry: The Use of Collage Making and Concept Mapping in Experiential Research.” Proceedings of the EKSIG conference: experiential knowledge, method and methodology. London: EKSIG.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., L. Manion, and K. Morrison. 2008. Research Methods in Education. Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, P. 2006. “Peer Assessment: Judging the Quality of Students’ Work by Comments Rather than Marks.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 43 (1): 69–82. doi: 10.1080/14703290500467566
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickens, L., and K. Watkins. 1999. “Action Research: Rethinking Lewin.” Management Learning 30 (2): 127–140. doi: 10.1177/1350507699302002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezzy, D. 2002. Qualitative Analysis: Practice and Innovation. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N. 1995. “Peer Feedback Marking: Developing Peer Assessment.” Innovations in Education and Training International 32 (2): 175–187. doi: 10.1080/1355800950320212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N. 2005. Improving Assessment Through Student Involvement: Practical Solutions for Aiding Learning in Higher and Further Education. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N., and J. Goldfinch. 2000. “Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks.” Review of Educational Research 70 (3): 287–322. doi: 10.3102/00346543070003287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielen, S., E. Peeters, F. Dochy, P. Onghena, and K. Struyven. 2010a. “Improving the Effectiveness of Peer Feedback for Learning.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 304–315. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielen, S., L. Tops, F. Dochy, P. Onghena, and S. Smeets. 2010b. “A Comparative Study of Peer and Teacher Feedback and of Various Peer Feedback Forms in a Secondary School Writing Curriculum.” British Educational Research Journal 36 (1): 143–162. doi: 10.1080/01411920902894070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gipps, C. 1999. “Socio-Cultural Aspects of Assessment.” Review of Research in Education 24 (1): 355–392. doi: 10.3102/0091732X024001355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, J., and J. Liu. 2005. “Guiding Principles for Effective Peer Response.” ELT Journal 59 (1): 31–38. doi: 10.1093/elt/cci004
   Google Scholar
• Harris, L. 2007. “Employing Formative Assessment in the Classroom.” Improving Schools 10 (3): 249–260. doi: 10.1177/1365480207082558
   Google Scholar
• Hatch, J. A. 2002. Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkins, D. 2008. A Teacher‘s Guide to Classroom Research. 4th ed. Berkshire: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jick, T. D. 1979. “Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.” Administrative Science Quarterly 24 (4): 602–611. doi: 10.2307/2392366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamins, M. L., and C. S. Dweck. 1999. “Person Versus Process Praise and Criticism: Implications for Contingent Self-Worth and Coping.” Developmental Psychology 35 (3): 835–847. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.35.3.835
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lankshear, C., and M. Knobel. 2004. A Handbook for Teacher Research: From Design to Implementation. Berkshire: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lemons, C. 2009. “Replication of Significant Correlations in Small Samples.” Evaluation & Research in Education 22 (2–4): 75–86. doi: 10.1080/09500790903302679
   Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. 1946. “Action Research and Minority Problems.” Journal of Social Issues 2 (4): 34–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C.-C., and C.-M. Tsai. 2005. “Peer Assessment Through Web-Based Knowledge Acquisition: Tools to Support Conceptual Awareness.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 42 (1): 43–59. doi: 10.1080/14703290500048838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNiff, J., and J. Whitehead. 2006. All You Need to Know About Action Research. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Meier, P. 2007. “Mind Maps a Tool for Eliciting and Representing Knowledge Held by Diverse Respondents.” Social Research Update 52: 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., L. Dawes, R. Wegerif, and C. Sams. 2004. “Reasoning as a Scientist: Ways of Helping Children to Use Language to Learn Science.” British Educational Research Journal 30 (3): 367–385. doi: 10.1080/01411920410001689689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, P. J. 2003. “The Effect of Scoring Criteria Specificity on Peer and Self-Assessment.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28 (4): 383–394. doi: 10.1080/0260293032000066218
   Google Scholar
• Min, H. 2005. “Training Students to Become Successful Peer Reviewers.” System 33 (2): 293–308. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003
   Google Scholar
• Min, H. 2006. “The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students’ Revision Types and Writing Quality.” Journal of Second Language Writing 15 (2): 118–141. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliver-Hoyo, M., and D. Allen. 2006. “The Use of Triangulation Methods in Qualitative Educational Research.” Journal of College Science Teaching 35 (4): 42–47.
   Google Scholar
• Orsmond, P., S. Merry, and K. Reiling. 2002. “The Use of Exemplars and Formative Feedback When Using Student Derived Marking Criteria in Peer and Self-Assessment.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (4): 309–323. doi: 10.1080/0260293022000001337
   Google Scholar
• Rust, C., M. Price, and B. O'Donovan. 2003. “Improving Students’ Learning by Developing their Understanding of Assessment Criteria and Processes.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28 (2): 147–164. doi: 10.1080/02602930301671
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, R. 1989. “Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems.” Instructional Science 18 (1): 119–144. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sluijsmans, D., S. Brand-Gruwel, and J. J. G. van Merrienboer. 2002. “Peer Assessment Training in Teacher Education: Effects on Performance and Perceptions.” Assesssment and Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (5): 443–454. doi: 10.1080/0260293022000009311
   Google Scholar
• Sluijsmans, D., S. Brand-Gruwel, J. J. G. van Merrienboer, and T. J. Bastiaens. 2003. “The Training of Peer Assessment Skills to Promote the Development of Reflection Skills in Teacher Education.” Studies in Educational Evaluation 29 (1): 23–42. doi: 10.1016/S0191-491X(03)90003-4
   Google Scholar
• Smith, H., A. Cooper, and L. Lancaster. 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. doi: 10.1080/13558000110102904
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzuki, L. A., M. K. Ahluwalia, A. K. Arora, and J. S. Mattis. 2007. “The Pond You Fish in Determines the Fish You Catch: Exploring Strategies for Qualitative Data Collection.” The Counseling Psychologist 35 (2): 295–327.
   Google Scholar
• Taber, K. 2007. Classroom-Based Research and Evidence-Based Practice: A Guide for Teachers. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. 2005. “Trends in Peer Learning.” Educational Psychology 25 (6): 631–645. doi: 10.1080/01443410500345172
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. 2009. “Peer Assessment.” Theory into Practice 48 (1): 20–27. doi: 10.1080/00405840802577569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. 2010. “Methodological Quandaries in Studying Process and Outcomes in Peer Assessment: Commentary.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 339–343. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J., and S. W. Ehly. 1998. Peer Assisted Learning. New Jersey: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J., and S. W. Ehly. 2001. “Peer Assisted Learning: A Framework for Consultation.” Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation 12 (2): 113–132. doi: 10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1202_03
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Gennip, N. A. E., M. S. R. Segers, and H. H. Tillema. 2010. “Peer Assessment as a Collaborative Learning Activity: The Role of Interpersonal Variables and Conceptions.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 280–290. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Steendam, E., G. Rijlaarsdam, L. Sercu, and H. Van den Berg. 2010. “The Effect of Instruction Type and Dyadic or Individual Emulation on the Quality of Higher-Order Peer Feedback in EFL.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 316–327. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Zundert, M., D. Sluijsmans, and J. Van Merriënboer. 2010. “Effective Peer Assessment Processes: Research Findings and Future Directions.” Learning and Instruction 20 (4): 270–279. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wheeldon, J., and J. Faubert. 2009. “Framing Experience: Concept Maps, Mind Maps, and Data Collection in Qualitative Research.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8 (3): 68–83.
   Google Scholar
• Yarrow, F., and K. Topping. 2001. “Collaborative Writing: The Effects of Metacognitive Prompting and Structured Peer Interaction.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 71 (2): 261–282. doi: 10.1348/000709901158514
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, F., Y. Liu, and T. Chan. 2005. “A Web-Based Learning System for Question Posing and Peer Assessment.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 42 (4): 337–348. doi: 10.1080/14703290500062557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar