Cited by 29Student Assessment and FeedbackDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions

Understanding master’s students’ peer feedback practices from the academic discourse community perspective: a rethinking of postgraduate pedagogies

Zhang, Yiran, Yu, Shulin, Yuan, Kaihao·2020·Teaching in Higher Education

Abstract

While recent research has highlighted the increasing importance of peer feedback as a supplementary pedagogy to supervision in higher education academic contexts, little is known regarding whether and how peer feedback can induct research students into the academic discourse community. Underpinned by the academic discourse community theory, this case study explores seven postgraduate students’ peer feedback practice and its effect on the revision of master thesis drafts. It examines data collected from multiple sources, including master students’ drafts of theses, peer written feedback, audio recordings of oral peer feedback conferences and students’ final theses. It was found that although different feedback providers used different types of feedback, feedback given in different languages and by different strategies to negotiate with the feedback receivers, peer feedback played an effective role in socialising Master’s students into the academic discourse community where grasping the gist of academic writing constitutes a significant part in higher education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13562517.2018.1543261

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Man et al. (2018) observed that autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students catalyze the construction of new academic communities and facilitate introduction into established scholarly networks.

    “For example, Man et al. (2018) examined autonomous peer feedback practices among postgraduate students and observed that such feedback not only catalyzes the construction of new academic communities but also facilitates the introduction of graduate students into established scholarly networks, echoing the findings of Ciampa and Wolfe (2023) as well as Zhang et al. (2020).”
  • In the academic community, peer feedback serves as a conduit for transmitting academic writing norms and nurturing interpersonal relationships.

    “In the academic community, peer feedback assumes a pivotal role, serving as a conduit for transmitting academic writing norms and nurturing interpersonal relationships (Zhang et al., 2020).”
  • Peer feedback facilitates the introduction of graduate students into established scholarly networks.

    “Furthermore, this practice facilitates the introduction of graduate students into established scholarly networks (Ciampa and Wolfe, 2023; Man et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2020).”
  • Studies have revealed a tendency among students to selectively incorporate feedback, prioritizing simpler suggestions over more complex ones when revising academic writing.

    “Studies have revealed a tendency among students to selectively incorporate feedback, giving priority to simpler suggestions over more complex ones when revising their academic writing (Shulgina et al., 2024a; Gao et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2020).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Zhang, Y., Yu, S., & Yuan, K.
Affiliations
University of Macau (MO)
Corresponding author
Yu, Shulin
Venue
Teaching in Higher Education
Published
2018-11-07
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
126-140
ISSN
  • 1356-2517 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1294
OpenAlex
W2900375606
Cited by
29
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
9.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Teaching in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Macau (MYRG2016-FED-00100)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Keywords
peer feedback, academic discourse communities, graduate students, master's students, academic writing, supervision

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