Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback

abstract: Writing scientific explanations is increasingly important, and today's students must have the ability to navigate the writing process to create a persuasive scientific explanation. One aspect of the writing process is receiving feedback before submitting a final draft. This study ex...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Other Authors: Lange, Katie Marie (Author)
Format: Dissertation
Language:English
Published: 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.9383
id ndltd-asu.edu-item-9383
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-asu.edu-item-93832018-06-22T03:02:00Z Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback abstract: Writing scientific explanations is increasingly important, and today's students must have the ability to navigate the writing process to create a persuasive scientific explanation. One aspect of the writing process is receiving feedback before submitting a final draft. This study examined whether middle school students benefit more in the writing process from receiving peer feedback or teacher feedback on rough drafts of scientific explanations. The study also looked at whether males and females reacted differently to the treatment groups. And it examined if content knowledge and the written scientific explanations were correlated. The study looked at 38 sixth and seventh-grade students throughout a 7-week earth science unit on earth systems. The unit had six lessons. One lesson introduced the students to writing scientific explanations, and the other five were inquiry-based content lessons. They wrote four scientific explanations throughout the unit of study and received feedback on all four rough drafts. The sixth-graders received teacher feedback on each explanation and the seventh-graders received peer-feedback after learning how to give constructive feedback. The students also took a multiple-choice pretest/posttest to evaluate content knowledge. The analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the group receiving peer feedback and the group receiving teacher feedback on the final drafts of the scientific explanations. There was, however, a significant effect of practice on the scores of the scientific explanations. Students wrote significantly better with each subsequent scientific explanation. There was no significant difference between males and females based on the treatment they received. There was a significant correlation between the gain in pretest to posttest scores and the scientific explanations and a significant correlation between the posttest scores and the scientific explanations. Content knowledge and written scientific explanations are related. Students who wrote scientific explanations had significant gains in content knowledge. Dissertation/Thesis Lange, Katie Marie (Author) Baker, Dale (Advisor) Megowan, Colleen (Committee member) Middleton, James (Committee member) Arizona State University (Publisher) Science Education Curriculum Development peer editing peer review scientific arguments scientific explanations teacher review writing in science eng 85 pages M.A. Curriculum and Instruction 2011 Masters Thesis http://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.9383 http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ All Rights Reserved 2011
collection NDLTD
language English
format Dissertation
sources NDLTD
topic Science Education
Curriculum Development
peer editing
peer review
scientific arguments
scientific explanations
teacher review
writing in science
spellingShingle Science Education
Curriculum Development
peer editing
peer review
scientific arguments
scientific explanations
teacher review
writing in science
Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
description abstract: Writing scientific explanations is increasingly important, and today's students must have the ability to navigate the writing process to create a persuasive scientific explanation. One aspect of the writing process is receiving feedback before submitting a final draft. This study examined whether middle school students benefit more in the writing process from receiving peer feedback or teacher feedback on rough drafts of scientific explanations. The study also looked at whether males and females reacted differently to the treatment groups. And it examined if content knowledge and the written scientific explanations were correlated. The study looked at 38 sixth and seventh-grade students throughout a 7-week earth science unit on earth systems. The unit had six lessons. One lesson introduced the students to writing scientific explanations, and the other five were inquiry-based content lessons. They wrote four scientific explanations throughout the unit of study and received feedback on all four rough drafts. The sixth-graders received teacher feedback on each explanation and the seventh-graders received peer-feedback after learning how to give constructive feedback. The students also took a multiple-choice pretest/posttest to evaluate content knowledge. The analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the group receiving peer feedback and the group receiving teacher feedback on the final drafts of the scientific explanations. There was, however, a significant effect of practice on the scores of the scientific explanations. Students wrote significantly better with each subsequent scientific explanation. There was no significant difference between males and females based on the treatment they received. There was a significant correlation between the gain in pretest to posttest scores and the scientific explanations and a significant correlation between the posttest scores and the scientific explanations. Content knowledge and written scientific explanations are related. Students who wrote scientific explanations had significant gains in content knowledge. === Dissertation/Thesis === M.A. Curriculum and Instruction 2011
author2 Lange, Katie Marie (Author)
author_facet Lange, Katie Marie (Author)
title Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
title_short Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
title_full Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
title_fullStr Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
title_full_unstemmed Scientific Explanations: Peer Feedback or Teacher Feedback
title_sort scientific explanations: peer feedback or teacher feedback
publishDate 2011
url http://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.9383
_version_ 1718699705160957952