The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum
Abstract
This study examines whether peer feedback can be a substitute for teacher feedback and which measures can be taken to improve its effectiveness. A pre‐test post‐test control group design examined the long‐term learning effects of individual peer feedback and of collective teacher feedback on writing assignments in secondary education. Moreover, it examined the added value of a priori question forms and a posteriori reply forms aimed at supporting the assessee's response to peer feedback. The study supports the ‘non‐inferiority’ hypothesis of there being no significant difference in students’ progress after plain substitutional peer feedback or teacher feedback. Both groups (plain peer feedback and teacher feedback), however, improved significantly less than the groups that worked with question or reply forms, confirming the added‐value of these forms. Almost half of the students found the received peer feedback helpful, but less than a quarter considered giving feedback an aid in their own learning process.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“According to the literature, there is a difference between teacher feedback and peer feedback as teachers are more subject-matter experts with lots of feedback experiences and knowledge, and compared to students they need less support in providing feedback (Gielen et al., 2010; Paulus, 1999).”
From A systematic review of the role of learning analytics in enhancing feedback practices in higher education (2022) · cites this paper as Gielen et al., 2010
Citations
Cites
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · cited 1×
“Both are outcomes of formative assessment, also called assessment for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998 ).”
BackgroundPeer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities
Topping, K. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170598 · Cited by 2,173
A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445 · Cited by 1,609 · cited 1×
“The effectiveness of peer feedback as such could be derived from a recent meta‐analysis on ‘peer assistance when writing’ (grade 4 through high school) by Graham and Perin ( 2007 ), who found a large positive effect size compared to students writing alone.”
BackgroundSustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society
Boud, D. (2000) · Studies in Continuing Education · doi:10.1080/713695728 · Cited by 1,545
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
Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005) · Research Repository (University of Gloucestershire) · Cited by 1,265
Formative Assessment: Revisiting the Territory
Sadler, D. R. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050104 · Cited by 1,107
A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004 · Cited by 703
Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/s1060-3743(00)00022-9 · Cited by 648 · cited 1×
“Previous research on peer and teacher feedback in first language writing education identifies the beneficial effects of peer comments and proves them to be of equal or even greater effect than teacher comments (Tsui & Ng, 2000 ).”
BackgroundImproving Students' Learning by Developing their Understanding of Assessment Criteria and Processes
Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. M. (2003) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930301671 · Cited by 636
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Higgins R.‘Be more critical!’: rethinking assessment feedback. Paper presented at thespaceBritish Educational Research Association Conference Cardiff University.space September 7–10 Wales.
- Sambell K., 1997, Improving student learning: improving students as learners, 56
- SAS Institute Inc., 2004, SAS/STAT 9.1 User's guide
- 10.3102/00346543068003249 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538 · Cited by 884
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
Self-citationThe Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies
Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3 · Cited by 446
Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis
Li, H., Xiong, Y., Hunter, C. V., Guo, X., & Tywoniw, R. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679 · Cited by 423
Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., van Ginkel, S., Macfadyen, L. P., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2022) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100489 · Cited by 246
Metadata
- Authors
- Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Gielen, Sarah
- ORCID
- Onghena, Patrick
- Venue
- British Educational Research Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-02
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 143-162
- ISSN
- 0141-1926 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-3518
- OpenAlex
- W2154733194
- Semantic Scholar
- fc58e55e2c811221edfb4f7a82df2ede5bc6615c
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 17.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- peer feedback, teacher feedback, writing instruction, high school students, writing assessment, student perceptions of feedback, long-term learning effects
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
