The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using Peer Feedback to Enhance the Quality of Student Online Postings: An Exploratory Study
Open accessAbstract
This study investigates the impact of peer feedback used as an instructional strategy to increase the quality of students’ online postings. While peer feedback has been demonstrated to support students’ learning in traditional classrooms, little is known about its efficacy in online discussions. To address this gap, we examined students’ perceptions of the value of giving and receiving peer feedback, specifically related to the quality of discussion postings in an online course. In addition, we investigated the impact of that feedback by comparing the quality of students’ postings, based on Bloom’s taxonomy, from pre-course to post-course. Results suggest that the quality of students’ postings was maintained through the use of peer feedback despite students’ preferences for instructor feedback. Students noted that peer feedback can be valuable and, more importantly, described how giving peer feedback not only reinforced their learning but enabled them to achieve higher understanding.
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
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Cited by
Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider
van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R. L., & Simons, P. R.-J. (2017) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003 · Cited by 269
A collaborative learning approach to dialogic peer feedback: a theoretical framework
Er, E., Dimitriadis, Y., & Gašević, D. (2021) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1786497 · Cited by 133
Enhancing active learning through collaboration between human teachers and generative AI
Pahi, K., Hawlader, S., Hicks, E., Zaman, A., & Phan, V. (2024) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100183 · Cited by 110
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
Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S. K., Biemans, H. J. A., Smits, M., Vervoort, M. T. W., & Verbaan, C.-L. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-11683-y · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., Lei, K., & Mong, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 412-433
- ISSN
- 1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108473060
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 39.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.
