Using Peer Feedback to Improve Students’ Scientific Inquiry
Abstract
This article examines a 7th grade teacher’s pedagogical practices to support her students to provide peer feedback to one another using technology during scientific inquiry. This research is part of a larger study in which teachers in California and Washington and their classes engaged in inquiry projects using a Web-based system called Web of Inquiry. Videotapes of classroom lessons and artifacts such as student work were collected as part of the corpus of data. In the case examined, Ms. E supports her students to collectively define “meaningful feedback,” thereby improving the quality of feedback that was provided in the future. This is especially timely, given the attention in Next Generation Science Standards to cross-cutting concepts and practices that require students discuss and debate ideas with each other in order to improve their understanding and their written inquiry reports (NGSS, 2013 ).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Understanding corrective feedback as a mediator of improvement is pivotal in peer assessment, and the results of this study support that idea.
“Understanding corrective feedback as a mediator of improvement is pivotal in peer assessment (Ketonen et al., 2020; McConlogue, 2015; Tasker & Herrenkohl, 2016), and the results of this study support that idea.”
From The development of secondary students' feedback literacy: peer assessment as an intervention (2020) · cites this paper as Tasker & Herrenkohl, 2016
Tasker and Herrenkohl (2016) found that students learn to value critical feedback.
“Tasker and Herrenkohl (2016) found that students learn to value critical feedback”
From The development of secondary students' feedback literacy: peer assessment as an intervention (2020) · cites this paper as Tasker and Herrenkohl (2016)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 85 · Cited by 29
- Authors
- Tasker, T. Q., & Herrenkohl, L. R.
- Affiliations
- Western Washington University (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Tasker, Tammy Q.
- Herrenkohl, Leslie Rupert
- Venue
- Journal of Science Teacher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-03-12
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 35-59
- ISSN
- 1046-560X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1847
- OpenAlex
- W2318600244
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 85
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 13.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Science Teacher Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- peer feedback, scientific inquiry, 7th grade science, technology-enhanced learning, teaching practice, Next Generation Science Standards, crosscutting concepts, cooperative learning, inquiry reports
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
