“Free selection and invitation” online peer assessment of undergraduates’ research competencies, flow, motivation and interaction in a research methods course
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?
A number of studies have begun to adopt multi-dimensional frameworks of engagement, integrating behavioural, cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions into their analyses.
“However, encouragingly, a number of studies have begun to adopt multi-dimensional frameworks of engagement, integrating behavioural, cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions into their analyses (e.g., Hisey et al., 2024;Lin et al., 2023).”
From Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: a systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Lin et al., 2023
Cites
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Second, researchers have mentioned that in addition to the learning strategy (e.g., peer feedback mode) adopted, students’ desires and beliefs are important factors that encourage them to improve their performance (Hsia et al., 2016; Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.795518 · Cited by 966 · see citing works
Exploring Engagement in Tasks in the Language Classroom
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190515000094 · Cited by 752 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Flow has been described as the “ultimate in engagement” (Philp & Duchesne, 2016).”
Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007 · Cited by 615 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Some researchers suggest that the strategic assignment of the reviewer can influence the effectiveness of online peer assessment (Gielen et al., 2010; Wang & Sun, 2018; Wang et al., 2019).”
Interactivity in multimedia learning: An integrated model
Domagk, S., Schwartz, R. N., & Plass, J. L. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.003 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Panadero, E., & Alqassab, M. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1600186 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Peer assessment in university teaching: evaluating seven course designs
van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930500262346 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Hsia, L.-H., Huang, I., & Hwang, G.-J. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.004 · Cited by 170 · cited 5× · see citing works
“Moreover, good-quality online peer assessment supports student learning, whereas poor-quality online peer assessment can frustrate students (Hsia et al., 2016).”
InfluentialPatchan, M. M., Schunn, C. D., & Correnti, R. J. (2016) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000103 · Cited by 165 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…as indicated by constructivist theory, effective learning and knowledge construction can occur when students construct assignments that are visible to others (Liu et al., 2016) because this enables students to reflect on their learning by observing others’ assignments (Patchan et al., 2016).”
What if pupils can assess their peers anonymously? A quasi-experimental study
Vanderhoven, E., Raes, A., Montrieux, H., Rotsaert, T., & Schellens, T. (2015) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.001 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Raes, A., Vanderhoven, E., & Schellens, T. (2015) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.823930 · Cited by 78 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Different online peer assessment strategies may affect students’ learning and performance (Hsia et al., 2016; Raes et al., 2015; Vanderhoven et al., 2015).”
Zhan, Y. (2021) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1804826 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: a systematic review
Bergdahl, N., Bond, M., Sjöberg, J., Dougherty, M., & Oxley, E. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y · Cited by 138 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lin, Y., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., Lu, Y., Zhou, P., & Wang, Y.
- Affiliations
- Central China Normal University (CN)
- United Imaging Healthcare (China) (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Yi
- Yang, Yuqin
- Lu, Yijie
- Zhou, Pinghong
- Wang, Yichi
- Venue
- Journal of Computing in Higher Education
- Published
- 2023-04-29
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 727-772
- ISSN
- 1042-1726 (ISSN-L)
- 1867-1233
- OpenAlex
- W4367367503
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 2.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Computing in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (72274076)
- Teacher Education College of Central China Normal University (CCNUTEIII 2021-06)
- Faculty of Artificial Intelligence Education, CCNU (2021ZNZJ012)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- online peer assessment, research skills, research methods course, flow, student motivation, peer interaction, conceptual knowledge, cloud classroom, scaffolding, undergraduate research training
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
