Triangulation of language assessment modes: learning benefits and socio-cognitive prospects

References

• Alias, M., Masek, A., & Salleh, H. (2015). Self, peer, and teacher assessments in problem based learning: Are they in agreements? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 309–317. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.157
   Google Scholar
• Allen, D. (2004). Oxford placement tests 2: Marking kit. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Mekhlafi, M. (2011). The relationship between writing self-efficacy beliefs and final examination scores in a writing course among a group of Arab EFL trainee-teachers. International Journal for Research in Education, 29(1), 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Azarnoosh, M. (2013). Peer assessment in an EFL context: Attitudes and friendship bias. Language Testing in Asia, 3(1), 2–10. doi:10.1186/2229-0443-3-11
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, R. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678
   Google Scholar
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102
   Google Scholar
• Brown, H., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment principles and classroom practices. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J., & Hudson, T. (1998). The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 653–675. doi:10.2307/3587999
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan, T. (2000). The efficacy of a world-wide web mediated formative assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16(3), 193–200. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2729.2000.00132.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burner, T. (2015). Formative assessment of writing in English as a foreign language. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 59(1), 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Carson, J., & Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1–19. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90012-0
   Google Scholar
• Cassidy, S. (2007). Assessing inexperienced students’ ability to self-assess: Exploring links with learning style and academic personal control. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(3), 313–330. doi:10.1080/02602930600896704
   Google Scholar
• Caulk, N. (1994). Comparing teacher and student responses to written work. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 181–188. doi:10.2307/3587209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleary, L. (1990). The fragile inclination to write: Praise and criticism in the classroom. The English Journal, 79, 22–28. doi:10.2307/819094
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• de Wever, B., van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2011). Assessing collaboration in a wiki: The reliability of university students’ peer assessment. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(4), 201–206. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn, K., & Mulvenon, S. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessments in education. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation, 14(7), 1–11.
   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
• Farhady, H., & Hedayati, H. (2009). Language assessment policy in Iran. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 132–141. doi:10.1017/S0267190509090114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foley, S. (2013). Student views of peer assessment at the International School of Lausanne. Journal of Research in International Education, 12(3), 201–213. doi:10.1177/1475240913509766
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (1986). Effects of systematic formative evaluation: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53(3), 199–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia, J., & de Caso, A. (2006). Comparison of the effects on writing attitudes and writing self-efficacy of three different training programs in students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(4/5), 272–289. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2006.06.006
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, C., Randel, A., & Earley, P. (2000). Understanding group efficacy: An empirical test of multiple assessment methods. Group & Organization Management, 25(1), 67–97. doi:10.1177/1059601100251005
   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
• Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). 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
• Guerrero, M., & Villamil, O. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68. doi:10.1111/modl.2000.84.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedgcock, J., & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity to teacher response in L2 composing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(2), 141–163. doi:10.1016/1060-3743(94)90012-4
   Google Scholar
• Hirose, K. (2008). Peer feedback in L2 English writing instruction. In K. Bradford-Watts, T. Muller, & M. Swanson (Eds.), JALT 2007 Conference proceedings (pp. 543–552). Tokyo: JALT.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, G. (2005). Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 321–342. doi:10.1191/1362168805lr169oa
   Google Scholar
• Igo, L. (2002). The accuracy of self-efficacy: A comparison of high school and college students. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 6(10), 70–85.
   Google Scholar
• Klassen, R. (2002). A question of calibration: A review of the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(2), 88–103. doi:10.2307/1511276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Commentary: Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 344–348. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwok, L. (2008). Students’ perception of peer evaluation and teachers’ role in seminar discussions. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5, 89–97.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2011). Bringing innovation to EFL writing through a focus on assessment for learning. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 19–33. doi:10.1080/17501229.2010.502232
   Google Scholar
• Leki, I. (1990). Potential problems with peer responding in ESL writing classes. CATESOL Journal, 3(1), 5–19.
   Google Scholar
• Lew, M., Alwis, W., & Schmidt, H. (2010). Accuracy of students’ self-assessment and their beliefs about its utility. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 135–156. doi:10.1080/02602930802687737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. (2009). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 525–536. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00968.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch, B., & Shaw, P. (2005). Portfolios, power, and ethics. TESOL Quarterly, 39(2), 263–297. doi:10.2307/3588311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magogwe, J., Ramoroka, B., & Mogana-Monyepi, R. (2015). Developing student-writers? Self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Academic Writing, 5(2), 20–28. doi:10.18552/joaw.v5i2
   Google Scholar
• Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46(3), 274–285. doi:10.1093/elt/46.3.274
   Google Scholar
• Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26(1), 75–100. doi:10.1177/0265532208097337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Miao, Y., Badger, R., & Zhen, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min, H. (2003). Why peer comments fail? English Teaching and Learning, 27, 85–103.
   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
• Mohd Saad, M., Abbasnasab Sardareh, S., & Ambarwati, E. (2013). Iranian secondary school EFL teachers’ assessment beliefs and roles. Life Science Journal, 10(3), 1638–1647.
   Google Scholar
• Mousavi, A. (2012). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing. Tehran, Iran: Rahnama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moussaoui, S. (2012). An investigation of the effects of peer evaluation in enhancing Algerian students’ writing autonomy and positive affect. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1775–1784. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.127
   Google Scholar
• Mulder, R., Pearce, J., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157–171. doi:10.1177/1469787414527391
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicol, D., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. doi:10.1080/03075070600572090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilson, L. (2003). Improving student peer feedback. College Teaching, 51, 34-38. doi:
   Google Scholar
• Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing academic English. Pearson: Longman Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 139–158. doi:10.1080/10573560308222
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. In M. Maehr & P. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F., & Valiente, G. (1997). The predictive and meditational role of the writing self-efficacy beliefs of upper elementary students. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 353–360. doi:10.1080/00220671.1997.10544593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panadero, E, Romero, M, & Strijbos, J. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort. Studies In Educational Evaluation, 39, 195-203. doi:
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paulus, T. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265–289. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80117-9
   Google Scholar
• Pintrich, P., & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 235–246. doi:10.1080/02602930120052396
   Google Scholar
• Pope, N. (2005). The impact of stress in self- and peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 51–63. doi:10.1080/0260293042003243896
   Google Scholar
• Prat-Sala, M., & Redford, P. (2012). Writing essays: Does self-efficacy matter? The relationship between self-efficacy in reading and in writing and undergraduate students’ performance in essay writing. Educational Psychology, 32(1), 9–20. doi:10.1080/01443410.2011.621411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouhi, A., & Azizian, E. (2013). Peer review: Is giving corrective feedback better than receiving it in L2 writing? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1349–1354. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.042
   Google Scholar
• Ruegg, R. (2014). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 42(1), 1–18. doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.958190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruegg, R. (2015). The relative effects of peer and teacher feedback on improvement in EFL students’ writing ability. Linguistics and Education, 29(2), 73–82. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2014.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611‒633. doi:10.1111/modl.v97.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio (pp. 35–37). Windsor, UK: Nfer-Nelson.
   Google Scholar
• Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review Of Educational Research, 78, 153–189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siewert, L. (2011). The effects of written teacher feedback on the academic achievement of fifth-grade students with learning challenges. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(1), 17–27. doi:10.1080/10459880903286771
   Google Scholar
• Soleimani, H., & Rahmania, M. (2014). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in writing improvement: A study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 5, 128–148.
   Google Scholar
• Strijbos, J., & 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. (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. (2010). Methodological quandaries in studying process and outcomes in peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 339–343. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping, K. (2003). Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reliability, validity and utility. In M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (Eds.), Optimizing new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 55–87). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327–369. doi:10.1111/lang.1996.46.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, S., & Tsai, 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. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Gennip, N., Segers, M., & Tillema, H. (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 Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Merrienboer, 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
• Wang, S., & Wu, P. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: The social cognitive perspective. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1589–1598. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, T. (2007). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e-learning environment? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 171–186. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00211.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warner, R., & Miller, J. (2015). Cultural dimensions of feedback at an Australian university: A study of international students with English as an additional language. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(2), 420–435. doi:10.1080/07294360.2014.956695
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D. (2006). Formative assessment: Getting the focus right. Educational Assessment, 11(3–4), 283–289. doi:10.1080/10627197.2006.9652993
   Google Scholar
• Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect: Self-efficacy and anxiety. System, 39(4), 510–522. doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.10.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacharias, N. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 38(1), 38–52. doi:10.1177/0033688206076157
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 15(1), 3–17. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002
   Google Scholar