Peer feedback involves providing opportunities for students to talk and listen, write, read meaningfully, and reflect on the content, ideas, issues, and concerns of an academic subject.
[1] Peer feedback can be defined as "a communication process through which learners enter into dialogues related to performance and standards.
[4] Some researchers consider peer feedback as an effective technique for the development of the students' writing whilst others promote its use in oral presentation activities.
[13] Peer feedback thereby offers students a sense of audience, which increases their motivation and confidence in writing.
However, Urzua[16] reminds us of how crucial is the question of training learners to cope with the task of evaluating their peers.
According to Benjamin Keating, peer feedback can actually recreate the unfair effects it aims to mitigate, not only between teachers and students, but also among students, especially in terms of gender (Spear;Stygall), race (Fox;Villanueva), linguistic differences (Allaei and Connor;Silva and Matsuda), and ideological differences (Horner;Myers;Trimbur).
According to Connor and Asenavage's study in 1994, they found that teacher feedback has more influences on students' writing work.
In addition, some students actually lack ability to give peer feedback owing to insufficient knowledge.
In this case, students hardly learn from others, so peer feedback loses track of its original rationale to help the other get improvement.
In his research, the exploration of various forms of peer review provides students with direct experiential learning.
[19] A study by McDonald and Boud (2003) investigated whether introducing self-assessment training would affect student learning, specifically on how they perform on external measures of achievement.
In an evaluative questionnaire at the end of the project, 84% of students stated the exercise (self-assessment reflective practices) had been beneficial, made them think more and become more critical.
They also perceived that feedback was given by their peers was a bit unclear explanation and sometimes it made the students felt doubt whether their work was really incorrect or not.
Charlotte Brammer states that teachers should discourage students from viewing peer review as a correction mechanism to recognizing its value as a collaborative engagement.
The study found that students who received extensive instruction and preparation in conducting peer reviews displayed a higher level of appreciation for the process.
[25] However, the findings also highlight concerns regarding unhelpful feedback and the reliability of peers' reviewing abilities, suggesting that teachers assist students in preparing for peer review and dedicating class time to facilitate it effectively, including having an understanding of the writer's audience, promoting meaningful group interaction, and encouraging thoughtful responses and revisions within the feedback.
[25] Establishing a sense of shared community among students is crucial for creating trust and confidence in their peers' ability to provide accurate and valuable revisions, as well as avoiding unhelpful feedback.
[26] Alexander argues that example projects, assessment criteria sheets, and of expectations are essential and that holding multiple sessions of peer review with teacher involvement is helpful in providing comprehensive feedback.
[26] In a six-week-long study of international students, Bee Chamcharatsri explored the benefits and limitations of peer review and sought to determine if verbal and written feedback was more beneficial.
Bishop states that integrating peer critiques, self-evaluation, and portfolio grading can promote collaboration, critical thinking, and student growth by showcasing progress and achievements, and that peer critiques encourage active feedback exchange, thus improving self-reflection.
[28] Bishop emphasizes how these approaches develop a deeper understanding of writing, boosting the confidence and proficiency of student writers.