Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Learning Environments Research
Published in: Learning Environments Research 1/2015

01-04-2015 | Original Paper

SWDYT: So What Do You Think? Canadian students’ attitudes about peerScholar, an online peer-assessment tool

Authors: Lisa-Marie Collimore, Dwayne E. Paré, Steve Joordens

Published in: Learning Environments Research | Issue 1/2015

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Middle- and high-school students’ attitudes towards online peer-assessment were described and examined in this study. One hundred and eighty-four (184) students answered a 16-item questionnaire about their experiences with an online peer-assessment tool called peerScholar. Overall, students in Canada converged with those in other countries with respect to attitude. That is, Canadian students tended to have a positive attitude towards the implementation of online peer-assessment in their classrooms. Additionally, students reported that they found the peer-assessment process helpful and that they felt that they benefited from the process. Unlike previous studies, students from a wider range of grade levels and subject areas were questioned. Directions for future studies that involve the peer-assessment process in the school system are discussed.
previous article The development, validation and use of the Rural and Remote Teaching, Working, Living and Learning Environment Survey (RRTWLLES)
next article Assessing the contribution of a constructivist learning environment to academic self-efficacy in higher education

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
Barker, L. J., McDowell, C., & Kalahar, K. (2009). Exploring factors that influence computer science introductory course students to persist in the major. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 153–157). Chattanooga, TN
Bennett, R. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18, 5–25.CrossRef
Castillo, J. C., Hartson, H. R., & Hix, D. (1998). Remote usability evaluation: Can users report their own critical incidents? In Proceedings of CHI 1998. Los Angeles, CA, April 18–23. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, pp. 253–254. 
Cheng, C. K., Paré, D. E., Collimore, L.-M., & Joordens, S. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a voluntary online discussion forum on improving students’ course performance. Computers & Education, 56, 253–261.CrossRef
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328–338.CrossRef
Cho, K., & Schunn, C. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48, 409–426.CrossRef
Cho, K., Schunn, C., & Wilson, R. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 891–901.CrossRef
Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2003). Young children and technology: What does the research say? Young Children, 58, 34–40.
Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43, 75–98.CrossRef
Davies, P. (2003). Closing the communications loop on the computerized peer assessment of essays. Association of Learning Technology Journal, 11(1), 41–54.
Davies, P. (2004). Don't write, just mark: the validity of assessing student ability via their computerized peer-marking of an essay rather than their creation of an essay, ALT-J, 12(3), 261–277.
Ebner, M., Kickmeier-Rust, M., & Holzinger, A. (2008). Utilizing wiki-systems in higher education classes: A chance for universal access? Universal Access in the Information Society, 7, 199–207. doi:10.​1007/​s10209-008-0115-2.CrossRef
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 32, 175–187.CrossRef
Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. London: Routledge Falmer.
Garland, V. E. (2006). Digital literacy and the use of wireless portable computers, planners, and cell phones for K–12 education. In L. Hin & R. Subramaniam (Eds.), Literacy in technology at the K–12 level: Issues and challenges (pp. 308–321). Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.CrossRef
Gibson, S., & Oberg, D. (1999). What’s happening with internet use in Alberta schools? Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 45, 239–252.
Gibson, S., & Oberg, D. (2004). Visions and realities of Internet use in schools: Canadian perspectives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 569–585.CrossRef
Gray, L., & Lewis, L. (2009). Educational technology in public school districts: Fall 2008 (NCES 2010–003). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Haugland, S. W. (1999). What role should technology play in young children’s learning? Young Children, 54, 26–31.
Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science. doi:10.​1007/​s11251-010-9133-6
Kingsley, B. (2010). But I’m no expert! Peer assessment by first-year psychology undergraduates. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 9, 7–15.CrossRef
Liaw, S. S., Huang, H. M., & Chen, G. D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computers & Education, 49, 1066–1080.CrossRef
Lin, S., Liu, E., & Yuan, S. (2002). Student attitudes toward networked peer assessment: Case studies of undergraduate students and senior high school students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29, 241–254.
Muir, M. (1994). Putting computer projects at the heart of the curriculum. Educational Leadership, 5, 30–33.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 309–323.CrossRef
Paré, D. E., & Joordens, S. (2008). Peering into large lectures: Examining peer and expert mark agreement using peerScholar, an online peer-assessment tool. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 24, 526–540.CrossRef
Paré, D. E., & Joordens, S. (2009). peerScholar: Tired of marking? Using peerScholar to explore the change in peer grading reliability as a function of increased number of peer evaluations. Presentation at the Society for Computers in Psychology Conference (SCiP), Long Beach, CA. Retrieved from http://​peerScholar.​com
Peck, K. L., & Dorricot, D. (1994). Why use technology? Educational Leadership, 51, 11–14.
Swaminathan, S., & Wright, J. L. (2003). Education technology in the early and primary years. In J. P. Isenberg & M. R. Jalongo (Eds.), Major trends and issues in early childhood education: Challenges, controversies, and insights (2nd ed., pp. 136–149). New York: Teachers College Press.
Swift, C., & Taylor, A. (2003). The digital divide—a new generation gap. Parental knowledge of their children’s Internet use. Paediatric Child Health, 8, 275–278.
Tillberg, H. K., & Cohoon, J. M. (2005). Attracting women to the CS major. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 26, 126–140.CrossRef
Tsai, C.-C. (2009). Internet-based peer assessment in high school settings. In T. Hin & R. Subrambiam (Eds.), Handbook of research on new media literacy at the K-12 level (pp. 743–754). Singapore: National Institute of Education.CrossRef
Tsai, C.-C., Lin, S. S. J., & Tsai, M.-J. (2001). Developing an internet attitude scale for high school students. Computers & Education, 37, 41–51.CrossRef
Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161–1174.CrossRef
Vernadakis, N., Avgerinos, A., Tsitskari, E., & Zachopoulou, E. (2005). The use of computer assisted instruction in preschool education: Making teaching meaningful. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33, 99–104.CrossRef
Vickerman, P. (2009). Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: An attempt to deepen learning? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, 221–230.CrossRef
Wen, M. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2006). University students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward (online) peer assessment. Higher Education, 51, 27–44.CrossRef
Wen, M. L., Tsai, C. C., & Chang, C. Y. (2006). Attitudes toward peer assessment: A comparison of the perspectives of pre- service and in-service teachers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 83–92.
Wong, A., & Ng, H. (2005). Peer assessment and computer literacy for junior high school students in geography lessons in Hong Kong. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 1, 120–134.
Metadata
Title
SWDYT: So What Do You Think? Canadian students’ attitudes about peerScholar, an online peer-assessment tool
Authors
Lisa-Marie Collimore
Dwayne E. Paré
Steve Joordens
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Learning Environments Research / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 1387-1579
Electronic ISSN: 1573-1855
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-014-9170-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Learning Environments Research 1/2015 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Assessing the contribution of a constructivist learning environment to academic self-efficacy in higher education

Original Paper

Effectiveness of teaching strategies for engaging adults who experienced childhood difficulties in learning mathematics

Original Paper

Architecture students’ perceptions of their learning environment and their academic performance

Original Paper

Associations between psychosocial aspects of English classroom environments and motivation types of Chinese tertiary-level English majors

Original Paper

Validation and application of the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey in English language teacher education classrooms in Iran

Original Paper

Teachers’ perceptions of effective school-wide programs and strategies for English language learners