Peer Feedback: Valuing Student Experts

Sackstein (2017) argues that peer feedback enhances learning for both the student providing feedback and the student receiving feedback (p. 4). He argues that if all students were empowered to give meaningful feedback to each other, less students would be sitting and waiting for teacher direction and more students would be taking responsibility for their own learning and demonstrating self-advocacy (Sackstein, 2017, pp. 11-13). Over years of teaching experience Sackstein (2017) discovered that “student-to-student feedback is often received more positively than teacher-to-student feedback” (pp. 3-4). Sackstein (2017) encourages teachers to shift their mentality from the teacher as the expert to a room full of experts of different things, with students as the experts, facilitators and leaders (p. 14). Sackstein (2017) warns that without clear expectations and teacher follow-through, peer feedback may breakdown (p. 14). However, with these teacher supports, student may be able to reach higher levels of learning and mastery.

In my fourth grade classroom, students work with partners or triads in all subjects. Yesterday, I listened in on a peer conference at the end of our writing lesson. Students were directed to share their “quick write” (using a newly learned pre-writing technique) with their writing partner. The partner was expected to listen by facing their partner and then respond with “I like …”. The pair of students I observed included one student who is writing at expected fourth grade level and one student with barely legible handwriting. When the second partner could not read his own handwriting, the student listener stepped right in. “I can tell you were writing about something important to you,” he began, “because you are excited about reading it to me and you wrote a lot more words than I’ve seen you write before”. This was by far a better response (and more positive) than I could have generated in that moment. This interaction is an excellent example of how peer feedback can be used to help empower both students with their learning.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t always go as smoothly as yesterday. Last week, students worked in triads to brainstorm ideas and creatively design our class mission statement. Student triads were given a large piece of paper and markers to show their thinking. After all groups put their ideas to paper, I encouraged students to move around the room and provide other peer groups with feedback on sticky notes. While the feedback was valuable from my perspective, most students complained that the sticky notes they received were “mean”. I looked at the feedback and didn’t agree. Notes like “add more color” and “you used the same word three times” provided valuable feedback from my perspective. I realized that I hadn’t prepared my students to receive critical feedback and their expectations were that they had already achieved perfection.

After exploring Stackstein’s suggestions and reflecting on peer feedback in my classroom over the last week, I am inspired to allow students more opportunities to provide their peers with feedback. I am reminded that clear expectations and teacher follow-through are necessary components to ensure that this process is valuable for all learners. I wonder how I can incorporate peer feedback into my spring feedback and motivation study. I will consider what expectations I will need to explicitly teach my students to ensure that this peer feedback is most valuable for all learners and has the greatest positive effect on students' motivation for future learning.

Reference

Sackstein, S. (2017). Peer feedback in the classroom: Empowering students to be the experts. Alexandria, VA, USA: ASCD.

Practice Without Feedback: A Better Option?

Fyfe and Rittle-Johnson (2017) studied the effects of feedback on immediate and 1-week delayed performance of mathematical skills. The study participants included 243 second and third grade students. All students took a pre-test, received scripted instruction, practiced mathematical problems, and demonstrated skill proficiency on a post-test. Students were retested one week later to study knowledge retention of the learned mathematical strategies. During the practice phase of the study, students either received immediate feedback after each practice problem, summative feedback after all the practice problems, or no feedback at all. Results of the study showed that immediate feedback resulted in the highest performance during the practice phase of learning. Practice with no feedback correlated with the highest levels of mastery (students scoring 100%) on the 1-week knowledge retention test (Fyfe & Rittle-Johnson, 2017).

These finding suggest that while immediate feedback may increase initial performance on practice problems, practice without feedback may have a stronger longer lasting effect on learning. In addition, summative feedback (feedback after all practice problems were complete) had an insignificant effect on performance on both the post-test and the 1-week knowledge retention test. The findings imply that the most effective feedback during practice for student learning and knowledge retention is either immediate or no feedback at all. While immediate feedback had a immediate positive effect on practice problem performance, there was no significant difference of performance on the post-test for students who received feedback versus students who received no feedback. This study was limited in that 45% of students showed mastery (100%) on all tests and may not have needed feedback to help them master the mathematical concepts presented (Fyfe & Rittle-Johnson, 2017).

The feedback offered in this study was restricted to correct or incorrect validation. Students were not encouraged to revise their work with the correct answer or defend their reasoning of the mathematical concepts. I am curious how feedback with time for revision work may affect performance on the 1-week knowledge retention test.  

The study raises complicated questions about which students benefit from feedback during practice and which students benefit from practice without feedback. In my own fourth grade classroom, I can picture a few students who already have a basic understanding of fourth grade mathematical concepts and strategies. These students may benefit most from practice without feedback. While this may not feel immediately effective, it could have a positive long-term effect on their learning. Other students who do not have background knowledge of our fourth grade mathematical strategies may benefit from immediate feedback during practice. Based on this study, I do not think that summative feedback (feedback after a full set of problems) is the most effective feedback that I can offer my students, nor is it a practice that I want to include in my feedback research study.

Reference

Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2016). Mathematics practice without feedback: A desirable difficulty in a classroom setting. Instructional Science, 45(2), 177-194. doi:10.1007/s11251-016-9401-1

Effective Feedback and Student Motivation

Van Loon and Roebers (2017) studied the effect of feedback on students’ self-evaluations of test performance and motivation for further study. The sample group for this study included 100 fourth grade and sixth grade students in Switzerland. Students were given a pre-test on new definitions of challenging grade level concepts, a study phase, and a concept test. The test asked students to correctly define the studied grade level concepts. After the concept test, students were asked to self-evaluate their performance and select concepts for future study. Students were randomly assigned to a feedback group where they either received feedback (correct definitions of concepts) for each specific test question, or they received feedback on each test question in addition to feedback helping them to separate the three idea units that the test included. After receiving feedback, students again self-evaluated their performance and chose concepts for restudy (Van Loon & Roebers, 2017).

Van Loon and Roebers (2017) discovered that both fourth and sixth grade students were overconfident when self-scoring their performance prior to receiving feedback. After receiving feedback, students’ self-evaluations of test performance were more accurate. The researchers found that there was no significant correlation between feedback type (specific test item feedback or item feedback and idea unit feedback) and students’ self-evaluation of performance or motivation for further study. Study results showed that fourth graders, before receiving feedback, were less likely to choose incorrect answers on the test for further study. However, after receiving feedback, there was no difference between fourth and sixth grade students in chosen questions for restudy (Van Loon & Roebers, 2017).

These results imply that fourth grade students do not have the skills to regulate their own learning and choose concepts for restudy without feedback. However, with feedback, fourth grade students are equally as effective as sixth grade students in self-regulating their learning (Van Loon & Roebers, 2017). This finding is of particular interest to both my research problem (effective feedback in elementary classrooms) and my current position as a fourth grade teacher. In this study, students completed self-evaluations after the assessment. In our current fourth grade math curriculum, students are asked to self-evaluate competence on unit objectives before the unit test. I wonder, if I moved this self-evaluation to post-test, if it would be a more valuable and accurate reflection? After reviewing this study, I am interested in continuing to explore how feedback can help students self-evaluate their performance. I am also extremely interested in how feedback can help students self-regulate their learning by motivating them to choose topics and concepts for restudy, practice and mastery.

Reference

Van Loon, M. H., & Roebers, C. M. (2017). Effects of feedback on self-evaluations and self-regulation in elementary school. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(5), 508-519. doi:10.1002/acp.3347