The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Web‐based peer assessment: feedback for students with various thinking‐styles
Abstract
Abstract This study used aptitude treatment interaction design to examine how feedback formats (specific vs. holistic) and executive thinking styles (high vs. low) affect web‐based peer assessment. An Internet‐based (anonymous) peer‐assessment system was developed and used by 58 computer science students who submitted assignments for peer review. The results indicated that while students with high executive thinking styles significantly improved over two rounds of peer assessment, low executive students did not improve through the cycles. In addition, high executive students contributed substantially better feedback than their low executive counterparts. In the second round of peer assessment, thinking style and feedback format interactively affected student learning. Low executive students receiving specific feedback significantly outperformed those receiving holistic feedback. In receiving holistic feedback, high executive thinkers outperformed their low executive counterparts. This study suggests that future web‐based peer assessment adopts a specific feedback format for all students.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Impact of Classroom Evaluation Practices on Students
Crooks, T. J. (1988) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543058004438 · Cited by 1,369
The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543061002213 · Cited by 1,313
Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis
Henri, F. (1992) · Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-77684-7_8 · Cited by 769
Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction
Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(96)90012-0 · Cited by 351
Social interaction as apprenticeship in thinking: Guided participation in spatial planning.
Rogoff, B. (1991) · Perspectives on socially shared cognition. · doi:10.1037/10096-015 · Cited by 145
Cited by
Defining Twenty-First Century Skills
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012) · Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2 · Cited by 1,809
The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x · Cited by 602
Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions
van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004 · Cited by 536
On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course
Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007 · Cited by 293
Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.005 · Cited by 243
Shih, M., Feng, J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.004 · Cited by 202
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.019 · Cited by 176
Cheng, K.-H., Liang, J.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.001 · Cited by 174
Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay
Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2016) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.002 · Cited by 176
Latifi, S., Noroozi, O., & Talaee, E. (2021) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13054 · Cited by 163
Developing science activities through a networked peer assessment system
Tsai, C.-C., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S.-M. (2002) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/s0360-1315(01)00069-0 · Cited by 154
Self-citationPeer-assessment in higher education--Twenty-first Century practices, challenges and the way Forward
Ashenafi, M. M. (2017) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1100711 · Cited by 120
Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.01.001 · Cited by 118
Lin, G.-Y. (2018) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.010 · Cited by 111
Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2020) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200 · Cited by 107
Tsai, C.-C., & Liang, J.-C. (2009) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-007-9047-0 · Cited by 105
Quality of Feedback in Higher Education: A Review of Literature
Haughney, K., Wakeman, S., & Hart, L. (2020) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci10030060 · Cited by 104
Peer assessment: judging the quality of students’ work by comments rather than marks
Davies, P. (2006) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703290500467566 · Cited by 94
Which do students prefer to evaluate their essays: peers or computer program
Lai, Y. (2010) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00959.x · Cited by 92
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/ec.43.1.f · Cited by 78
Hsia, L., Huang, I., & Hwang, G. (2016) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12248 · Cited by 73
Training nursing students' communication skills with online video peer assessment
Lai, C.-Y. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.017 · Cited by 72
Liu, X., Li, L., & Zhang, Z. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1324018 · Cited by 66
Wilson, M. J., Diao, M. M., & Huang, L. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.881980 · Cited by 59
Cheng, K.-H., Hou, H.-T., & Wu, S.-Y. (2014) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.649766 · Cited by 52
Chen, I.-C., Hwang, G.-J., Lai, C.-L., & Wang, W.-C. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103856 · Cited by 46
Strijbos, J.-W., Ochoa, T. A., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Segers, M. S. R., & Tillema, H. H. (2009) · Cognitive and Emotional Processes in Web-Based Education · doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-392-0.ch018 · Cited by 48
Bains, M., Kaliski, D. Z., & Goei, K. A. (2022) · Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00039.2021 · Cited by 38
Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., Schellens, T., & Raes, A. (2018) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0329-x · Cited by 38
Does anonymity matter? Examining quality of online peer assessment and students' attitudes
Kobayashi, M. (2020) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.4694 · Cited by 29
Wang, J., Gao, R., Guo, X., & Liu, J. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1693493 · Cited by 19
Rezai, A., Naserpour, A., & Rahimi, S. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2022.2086575 · Cited by 16
Chang, S.-H., Yu, L.-C., Kuo, Y.-K., Mai, Y.-T., & Chen, J.-D. (2015) · Journal of Baltic Science Education · doi:10.33225/jbse/15.14.379 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 420-432
- ISSN
- 0266-4909 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2729
- OpenAlex
- W2116917334
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 35.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
