Peer feedback on college students’ writing: exploring the relation between students’ ability match, feedback quality and essay performance

References

• Buckley, E., & Cowap, L. (2013). An evaluation of the use of Turnitin for electronic submission and marking and as a formative feedback tool from an educator’s perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 562–570. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Wilson, R. W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891–901. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (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
• Flower, L., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision+composition. College Composition and Communication, 37(1), 16–55. doi: 10.2307/357381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). 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
• Handley, K., Price, M., & Millar, J. (2011). Beyond ‘doing time’: Investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback. Oxford Review of Education, 37(4), 543–560. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2011.604951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53–70. doi: 10.1080/07294360123776
   Google Scholar
• Huisman, B., Admiraal, W., Pilli, O., van de Ven, M., & Saab, N. (2016). Peer assessment in MOOCs: The relationship between peer reviewers’ ability and authors’ essay performance. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12520
   Google Scholar
• King, A. (1997). ASK to THINK-TEL WHY: A model of transactive peer tutoring for scaffolding higher level complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 32(4), 221–235. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3204_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). Measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer assessment: Feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420–432. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00198.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (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. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luxton-Reilly, A. (2009). A systematic review of tools that support peer assessment. Computer Science Education, 19(4), 209–232. doi: 10.1080/08993400903384844
   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. doi: 10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C. A., & Schunn, C. D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41(2), 381–405. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9236-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science. doi: 10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowball, J. D., & Mostert, M. (2013). Dancing with the devil: Formative peer assessment and academic performance. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(4), 646–659. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2012.705262
   Web of Science ®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. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strijbos, J. W., & Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 265–269. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. doi: 10.3102/00346543068003249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20–27. doi: 10.1080/00405840802577569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Designing student peer assessment in higher education: Analysis of written and oral peer feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2), 135–147. doi: 10.1080/13562510500527685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (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