| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立交通大學 === 理學院網路學習碩士在職專班 === 92 === Evaluation plays an important role in students’ learning. Under the environment of Multiple Intelligences teaching and learning, conventional paper-based evaluation shows more restriction in evaluation. Peer assessment finds its beginning with the development of multiple assessment while the network makes it more mature. During the process of peer assessment, each student functions as an author, a reviewer, and an adapter. During the process of role transfer, students will not only learn more actively and willingly, but also attain higher critical thinking skills. With the network system as a medium and control center, we can eliminate the restrictions of time and place. Moreover, the anonymity of networked environment will create more fairness and effectiveness than paper-based peer assessment does.
This study first discussed the theoretical foundations of peer assessment from a constructivist perspective and then modified the previous networked peer assessment models. Finally, a networked peer assessment activity was conducted by designing a web-based three round peer assessment (3RPA) system.
The subjects of this study included 184 tenth graders, each of them from four different classes in Hsinchu Senior High School. The 3-RPA activity was performed on a class basis for six weeks. In each round, every student was required to critique the work of other ten counterpeers anonymously. Thus, each of them was supposed to receive ten comments and scores from their peer reviewers. At its end, experts (e.g., teachers) would evaluate students’ work as well. However, the results of the evaluation were not accessible to any of the students. Most importantly, students’ attitudes toward networked peer assessment were collected before and after the activity.
Some significant findings are revealed in this study. Firstly, the networked peer assessment actually can improve the quality of students’ work . Secondly, the scores of peer reviewers are highly consistent with experts’ grading, indicating the validity of senior high students’ peer assessment. Thirdly, reinforcing feedbacks have more positive influences on every aspect of students’ work while didactic feedbacks have negative influences on it. With regard to students’ attitudes toward the networked peer assessment, no significance was found between before and after the activity.
This research also allowed all of the participants to write down their feelings and suggestions about the networked peer assessment and the system they used (e.g., 3RPA ) after the activity. Most of them listed the merits of the activity while some of them found out some limitations about the system. All of their feelings, praises and suggestions were compiled for the use of future research and references.
As what is shown in the peer feedback analysis, didactic feedbacks have negative influence on students’ learning. However, in traditional classrooms, most teachers tend to provide their students with didactic feedbacks. Therefore, the author suggests that though networked peer assessment is not a panacea for learning, it offers students an alternative way while they are learning. It is true that with the networked peer assessment system as a learning aid, the quality of students’ work is improved. And that accounts for why networked peer assessment system is worth promoting.
|
|---|
