Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021): Evaluation, feedback, equity: a challenge in education

Peer-assessment and teachers’ training: Tips and impacts

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2021oa12481
Submitted
settembre 7, 2021
Published
2021-12-21

Abstract

The article investigates the evaluative competence of in-service teachers involved in a peer-assessment activity and their perceptions about the impacts of the practice itself. The context of the study is represented by a Level I University Master based on the Trialogical Learning Approach in which participants experiment with innovative teaching methodologies, from design to implementation to evaluation. After having described in detail the methods and procedures of the peer-assessment activities covered by the study, the method of the quali-quantitative analysis of the collected data is illustrated: 407 rubrics compiled by 43 teachers and 28 semi-structured questionnaires to support the final reflection around the activities.

Overall, the analyzes show how the peer-assessment activity just as proposed has stimulated, on the one hand, the enhancement of specific professional skills, on the other, the motivation to learn and the feeling of belonging to a community of practices. The elements supporting the effectiveness of the evaluation practice and the possible repercussions in the classroom are discussed.

References

  1. Black P., Harrison C., Lee C., Marshall B., and Wiliam D. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Putting it into practice. Bickingham: Open University press.
  2. Carless D., and Boud D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8): 1315-1325. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.
  3. Carless D., Bridges S., Chan C., and Glofcheski R. (2017). Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer.
  4. Cesareni D., and Sansone N. (2019). Il peer-feedback collaborativo per il miglioramento continuo dei prodotti. Italian Journal of Educational Research, 139-156. «testo disponibile al sito: https://ojs.pensamultimedia.it/index.php/sird/article/view/3274» 20/08/2021.
  5. Cheng M. M. H., Cheng A. Y. N., and Tang S. Y. F. (2010). Closing the gap between the theory and practice of teaching: Implications for teacher education programmes in Hong Kong. Journal of Education for Teaching, 36(1): 91-104. DOI: 10.1080/02607470903462222.
  6. Foschi L. C., and Cecchinato G. (2019). Validity and reliability of peer-grading in in-service teacher training. Italian Journal Of Educational Research: 177-194. «testo disponibile al sito: https://ojs.pensamultimedia.it/index.php/sird/article/view/3276» 20/08/2021.
  7. Foschi L.C., Cecchinato G., and Say F. (2019). Quis iudicabit ipsos iudices? Analisi dello sviluppo di competenze in un percorso di formazione per insegnanti tramite la valutazione tra pari e l’autovalutazione. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1): 49-64. DOI: 10.17471/2499-4324/1019.
  8. Gielen S, Dochy F. and Dierick S. (2003). Evaluation the Consequential Validity of New Modes of Assessment: The Influence of Assessment on Learning, Including Pre-, Post- and True Assessment Effects. In Segers M., Dochy F. and Cascallar E., a cura di, Optimising New Modes of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards. Dordrech: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/0-306-48125-1_3.
  9. Giovannini L., Loiodice I., Lucisano P., Portera A., a cura di (2017), Strategie orientative e transizione università-lavoro. Roma: Armando.
  10. Grion V., and Tino C. (2018). Verso una “valutazione sostenibile” all’università: percezioni di efficacia dei processi di dare e ricevere feedback fra pari. Lifelong Lifewide Learning, 14(31): 38-55. DOI: 10.19241/lll.v14i31.104.
  11. Grion V., Serbati A., Tino C., and Nicol D. (2017). Ripensare la teoria della valutazione e dell’apprendimento all’università: un modello per implementare pratiche di peer review. Giornale Italiano della Ricerca Educativa, 19: 209-226. «testo di-sponibile al sito: https://ojs.pensamultimedia.it/index.php/sird/article/view/2554» 20/08/2021.
  12. Hanrahan S. J. and Isaacs G. (2001) Assessing Self- and Peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1): 53-70. DOI: 10.1080/07294360123776.
  13. Hattie J., and Timperley H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1): 81-112. DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487.
  14. Ibarra-Sáiz M. S., Rodríguez-Gómez G., Boud D., Rotsaert T., Brown S., Salinas-Salazar M.L., and Rodríguez- Gómez H. M. (2020). El futuro de la evaluación en la educación superior. RELIEVE, 26(1): 1-6. DOI:10.7203/relieve.26.1.17323.
  15. Leahy S., Lyon C., Thompson M. and Wiliam D. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63(3): 18-24. «testo disponibile al sito: https://www.rbteach.com/sites/default/files/classroom-assessment-minute-by-minute-day-by-day.pdf» 20/08/2021.
  16. Lipnevich A.A., and Smith J.K. (2009). Effects of differential feedback on students’ examination performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(4): 319-333. DOI: 10.1037/a0017841.
  17. Liu X., and 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. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2013.823540.
  18. Lynch R., McNamara P. M., and 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. DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2011.643396.
  19. Magnoler P., Notti A.M. and Perla L., a cura di (2017). La professionalità degli insegnanti. La ricerca e le pratiche. Lecce: PensaMultimedia.
  20. Nicol D. (2018). Unlocking generative feedback through peer reviewing. In Grion V. and Serbati A., a cura di, Valutare l’apprendimento o valutare per l’apprendimento? Verso una cultura della valutazione sostenibile all’Università. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia.
  21. O’Donovan B., Rust C. and Price M. (2016). A Scholarly Approach to Solving the Feedback Dilemma in Practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6): 938-949. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2015.1052774.
  22. Orpen, C. (1982). Student Versus Lecturer Assessment of Learning: A Research Note. Higher education, 11: 567-572. DOI: 10.1007/BF00194421.
  23. Panadero E., Alonso-Tapia J., and Huertas J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6): 806-813. DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007.
  24. Poon W., McNaught C., Lam P., and Kwan H. S. (2009). Improving assessment methods in university science education with negotiated self-and peer-assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 16(3): 331-346. DOI: 10.1080/09695940903319729.
  25. Rivoltella P. C., (2020). Nuovi alfabeti. Educazione e culture nella società post-mediale. Brescia: Scholè.
  26. Rivoltella P. C., Rossi P.G., a cura di (2017). L’agire didattico. Manuale per l’insegnante. Brescia: La scuola.
  27. Rushton C., Ramsey P. and Rada R. (1993). Peer assessment in a collaborative hypermedia environment: A case study. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20: 75-80.
  28. Sadler D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional science, 18(2):119-144. DOI: 10.1007/BF00117714.
  29. Sansone N. (2020). E-tivity. In: Limone P., Toto G.A., Sansone N., a cura di, Didattica universitaria a distanza. Tra emergenze e futuro. Progedit, Bari (2020).
  30. Sansone N., and Ritella G. (2020). Formazione insegnanti “aumentata”: integrazione di metodologie e tecnologie al servizio di una didattica socio-costruttivista. Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 15(1): 70-88. «testo disponibile al sito: https://www.ckbg.org/qwerty/index.php/qwerty/article/view/372» 20/08/2021.
  31. Sansone N., Bortolotti I., and Buglass S. (2016). The trialogical learning approach in practices: Reflections from pedagogical cases. Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 11(2): 99-120. «testo disponibile al sito: https://www.ckbg.org/qwerty/index.php/qwerty/article/viewFile/240/232» 20/08/2021.
  32. Sansone N., Cesareni D., Bortolotti I., and Buglass S. (2019). Teaching technology-mediated collaborative learning for trainee teachers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3): 381-394. DOI: 10.1080/1475939X.2019.1623070.
  33. Sansone N., Cesareni D., Ligorio M. B., Bortolotti I., & Buglass S. L. (2020). Developing knowledge work skills in a university course. Research Papers in Education, 35(1): 23-42. DOI: 10.1080/02671522.2019.1677754.
  34. Schartel S. A. (2012). Giving feedback – An integral part of education. Best practice & research Clinical anaesthesiology, 26(1): 77-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2012.02.003.
  35. Sibilio M. and Aiello P., a cura di (2018). Lo sviluppo professionale dei docenti. Ragionare di agentività per una scuola inclusiva. Napoli: EdiSES.
  36. Sluijsmans D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel S., and van Merriënboer J. J. G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5): 443-454. DOI: 10.1080/0260293022000009311.
  37. Strijbos J. V., and Sluijsmans D. (2010). Unraveling peer assessment: methodological, functional and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20: 265-269. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.002.
  38. Topping K. J. (1998). Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3): 249-276. DOI: 10.3102/00346543068003249.
  39. Topping K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6): 631-645. DOI: 10.1080/01443410500345172.
  40. Topping K. J. (2017). Peer Assessment: Learning by Judging and Discussing the Work of Other Learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 1(1): 1-17. DOI: 10.31532/InterdiscipEducPsychol.1.1.007.
  41. Topping K. J. (2021). Peer Assessment: Channels of Operation. Education Sciences, 11(3): 91. DOI: 10.3390/educsci11030091.
  42. Vannini I. (2019). Valutare per apprendere e progettare. In: Nigris E., Balconi B. and Zecca L., a cura di, Dalla progettazione alla valutazione didattica. Progettare, documentare e monitorare. Milano-Torino: Pearson Italia.
  43. Vickerman P. (2009). Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: An attempt to deepen learning?. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2): 221-230. DOI: 10.1080/02602930801955986.
  44. Wen M. L. and Tsai C. (2006). University Students’ Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward (Online) Peer Assessment. Higher Education, 51: 27-44. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-004-6375-8.
  45. Wiliam D., Lee, C., Harrison C. and Black P. (2004). Teachers Developing Assessment for Learning: Impact on Student Achievement. Assessment in Education, 11(1): 49-65. DOI: 10.1080/0969594042000208994.
  46. Yilmaz F. M. (2017). Reliability of scores obtained from self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments on teaching materials prepared by teacher candidates. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(2): 395-409. DOI: 10.12738/estp.2017.2.0098.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...