ANALYSIS OF PROSPECTIVE PHYSICS TEACHERS’ FEEDBACK ON ONLINE PEER-ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION

K. Khusaini(1),

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpfi.v13i1.6509


(1) Program Studi Pendidikan Fisika, Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia

Abstract

This study aimed to analyse prospective physics teachers’ feedback during the implementation of online peer-assessment in Teaching Physics in English course. Twenty prospective physics teachers participated in this study. They were familiar with the use of smart phone in their daily life. They tend to communicate using social media such as WhatsApp application. The students have practiced in using paper based peer-assessment in other courses, but they have not applied it in online method providing real time feedback and score. The implementation of online peer-assessment challenged the students to assess their peer objectively. The lecturers’ feedback influence students’ skills how to evaluate their peer performance. Several factors may influence the quality of students’ online peer-assessment such as students’ culture back ground, implementation of the online peer-assessment, and practicant’s performance.

Keywords

analysis; feedback; pre-service physics teachers; online peer-assessment

Full Text:

PDF

References

Akalin, S., & Sucuoglu, B. (2015). Effects of Classroom Management Intervention Based on Teacher Training and Performance Feedback on Outcomes of Teacher-Student Dyads in Inclusive Classrooms. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(3), 739-758.

Anderson, L. S., Healy, A. F., Kole, J. A., & Bourne, L. E. (2013). The clicker technique: Cultivating efficient teaching and successful learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(2), 222-234.

Auld, R. G., Belfiore, P. J., & Scheeler, M. C. (2010). Increasing pre-service teachers’ use of differential reinforcement: Effects of performance feedback on consequences for student behavior.Journal of Behavioral Education, 19(2), 169-183.

Berry, J. (2009). Technology support in nursing education: Clickers in the classroom. Nursing Education Perspectives, 30(5), 295-298.

Brosvic, G. M., & Epstein, M. L. (2007). Enhancing learning in the introductory course. The Psychological Record, 57(3), 391.

Brosvic, G. M., Epstein, M. L., Cook, M. J., & Dihoff, R. E. (2005). Efficacy of error for the correction of initially incorrect assumptions and of feedback for the affirmation of correct responding: Learning in the classroom. The Psychological Record, 55(3), 401.

Conroy, M. A., Sutherland, K. S., Snyder, A., Al-Hendawi, M., & Vo, A. (2009). Creating a Positive Classroom Atmosphere: Teachers’ Use of Effective Praise and Feedback. Beyond Behavior,18(2), 18-26.

Dochy,F. Segers,M. Sluijsmans, D.(1999) The use of Self-,peer-, and Co-Assessment in Higher Education: a Review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350.

Duchaine, E. L., Jolivette, K., & Fredrick, L. D. (2011). The effect of teacher coaching with performance feedback on behavior-specific praise in inclusion classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 34(2), 209-227.

Khusaini.(2016).Online Peer-Assessment in Teaching Physics in English class for improving pre-service physics teachers learning. Makalah disajikan dalam 3rd International Conference on Research, Implementation and Education of Education of Mathematics and Science, FMIPA Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 16-17 Mei.

Klein, K., & Kientz, M. (2013). A model for successful use of student response systems.Nursing education perspectives. 34(5), 334-338.

Liu, Ngar-Fun& Carless, David.(2006).Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment.Teaching in Higher education, 11(3), 279-290.

McLaren, S. V. (2012). Assessment is for learning: supporting feedback. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(2), 227-245.

Nuryantini, A. Y., Setiadi, T., Kurniawan, K., & Farida, I. (2015). The Application Of Authentic Assessment With Feedback To Improve The Competence Of Mts 2 Bandung Students In Constructing A Scientific Report Of Motion Material In Science Learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia, 11(2), 108-116.

Seevers, M. T., Rowe, W. J., & Skinner, S. J. (2014). Praise in public, criticize in private? An assessment of performance feedback transparency in a classroom setting. Marketing Education Review, 24(2), 85-100.

Segedy, J. R., Kinnebrew, J. S., & Biswas, G. (2013). The effect of contextualized conversational feedback in a complex open-ended learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 71-89.

Topping, Keith .(1999). Peer Assessment between students in Colleges and Universities.Review of Educational research,68 (3),249-276.

Valle, C., Andrade, H., Palma, M., & Hefferen, J. (2016). Applications of Peer Assessment and Self-Assessment in Music. Music Educators Journal,102(4), 41-49.

Vojdanoska, M., Cranney, J., & Newell, B. R. (2010). The testing effect: The role of feedback and collaboration in a tertiary classroom setting.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(8), 1183-1195.

Wen, M. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Online peer assessment in an inservice science and mathematics teacher education course. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(1), 55-67.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License