The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Student peer review as a process of knowledge creation through dialogue
Abstract
This study contributes to a better understanding of the potential of student peer review in higher education by examining how repeated practice influences student learning. The study reports on the experiences of undergraduate science students who were systematically trained in peer review over three years. Twelve were interviewed in both their second and third year. It was found that multiple experiences had a positive influence in shaping and embedding a culture of peer review in the programme. The reviews used both formal and informal dialogic processes, and through these, students developed an advanced skill set that enabled them to provide and utilise quality feedback. Students saw peer review as a type of research inquiry that led to a deeper understanding of (a) disciplinary knowledge, (b) being a peer reviewer, (c) knowledge about self and (d) knowledge of others. These results demonstrate the impact of long-term training in peer review on students’ learning experiences in higher education.
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
“For example, reviewing drafts or incorporating peer review before submission helps identify AI-generated content while also facilitating deeper understanding and feedback skills 32 —also core elements of PBL. 16”
From Structured Development of Learning and Assessment Tasks to Prevent Generative AI Misuse and Enhance AI Literacy in the Faculty in Physiotherapy Education (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
Citations
Cites
Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal
Sadler, D. R. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930903541015 · Cited by 1,138
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
Developing sustainable feedback practices
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075071003642449 · Cited by 869
Topping, K. J. (2009) · Theory Into Practice · doi:10.1080/00405840802577569 · Cited by 785 · cited 1×
“It is generally accepted that student peer review can be a useful formative assessment method that provides feedback to improve learning experiences (Mulder, Pearce, & Baik, 2014b; Topping, 2009, p. 329).”
BackgroundTraining teachers in peer-assessment skills: effects on performance and perceptions
Sluijsmans *, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Martens, R. L. (2004) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/1470329032000172720 · Cited by 127
Research works printed but not linked: 39
- 10.1080/02602938.2015.1100711 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1469787416654794 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602938.2011.649244 · DOI
- 10.1080/713695728 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1515/9781400823192.1 · DOI
- Brammer C., 2007, Composition Studies, 35, 71
- 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040040 · DOI
- 10.1080/03075079712331381064 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006 · DOI
- 10.1177/0741088306289261 · DOI
- Daniel B. K., 2018, Higher education research methodology: A step-by-step guide to the research process
- 10.1023/A:1016082229411 · DOI
- 10.1891/1945-8959.14.1.110 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602938.2016.1194368 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930801955960 · DOI
- 10.4324/9780203160329 · DOI
- 10.1080/13562510600680582 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/02602938.2013.823540 · DOI
- Merriam S. B., 1998, Qualitative research and case study applications in education
- Moore C., 2013, Issues in Educational Research, 23, 196
- 10.1080/02602938.2013.860421 · DOI
- 10.1177/1469787414527391 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602931003786559 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1159/000106415 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930903201651 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930500099177 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930050025006 · DOI
- Pearce J., 2009, Involving students in peer review: Case studies and practical strategies for university teaching
- 10.1080/02602930301671 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008 · DOI
- 10.1177/1098214005283748 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/02602938.2018.1548559 · DOI
- 10.1080/13562510500527685 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930601116896 · DOI
- 10.1080/13562517.2017.1289509 · DOI
- 10.1080/13614576.2011.566812 · DOI
- 10.1080/13562510701794050 · DOI
- Wenger E., 1998, Systems Thinker, 9, 1
- 10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dialogism in feedback literacies: a critical review
Myers, T., & Buchanan, J. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2478159 · Cited by 16
Kim, S. (2023) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2022.2073983 · Cited by 7
Lindbäck, Y., Valeskog, K., Schröder, K., & Sonesson, S. (2025) · Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development · doi:10.1177/23821205251378794 · Cited by 4
“…or incorporating peer review before submission helps identify AI-generated content while also facilitating deeper understanding and feedback skills 32 — also core elements of PBL. 16 Similarly, requiring students to submit audio re fl ections or apply knowledge in case-based scenarios enhances…”
Metadata
- Authors
- Reddy, K., Harland, T., Wass, R., & Wald, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Otago (NZ)
- Higher Education Development Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
- Corresponding author
- Reddy, Krishneel
- Venue
- Higher Education Research & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-06-23
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 825-837
- ISSN
- 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8366
- OpenAlex
- W3038043200
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 8.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Higher Education Research & Development (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- student peer review, peer review training, knowledge production, dialogic process, feedback skills, undergraduate science students, self-knowledge, disciplinary knowledge, student learning
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