Peer-Review from Learners’ Perspective

  • Elisabeth KatzlingerEmail author
  • Michael A. Herzog
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8699)


Within the framework of a broad four-year study with 550 participants in the fields of e-business and business informatics that was conducted at a German and an Austrian university, different media-based learning methods and their effects were compared. In order to be able to draw comparisons with other learning methods, a game-based learning scenario (Beer Game), a case study that was worked on in interuniversity groups and documented in a Wiki as well as peer-review were factored into the study. This article focuses on different pedagogical and technical varieties of implementation of a peer-review learning scenario as well as the qualitative analysis of students’ feedback and improvement suggestions. Compared with other media-based learning scenarios, the peer-review method was rated surprisingly positive in most respects. However, the suggestions for improvement analyzed for the present study mainly concerned a lack of anonymity in courses with a small number of participants, a lack of knowledge on the part of the reviewers, a wish for more reviews, the possibility to defend one’s paper after the review and a wish for examples what good peer reviews look like. Furthermore the study mirrors the progress that was achieved in the recent past of the peer-review tools.


Peer review Virtual collaborative learning e-business education Cross teaching Peer learning Peer assessment 


  1. Breuer, F., Schreier, M.: Lehren und Lernen qualitativer Forschungsmethoden. In: Mey, G., Mruck, K. (Hrsg.) Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (2010)Google Scholar
  2. Ehlers, U., Steinert, A.: Networked Learning in a Networked World (2010).
  3. Ge, Z.: Exploring e-learners’ perceptions of net-based peer-reviewed English writing. Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn. 6(1), 75–91 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Herzog, M.A.; Katzlinger, E.: Peer Review als aktivierende Lernmethode in der universitären Lehre. Moodlemoot 23. 2. 2012, Linz (2012)Google Scholar
  5. Hoidn, S.: Lernkompetenzen an Hochschulen fördern. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (2010)Google Scholar
  6. Hornung-Prähauser, V., Wieden-Bischof, D.: Theorie und Praxis zu E-Portfolios in der Hochschule. In: Hugger, K.-U, Walber, M. (Hrsg.) Digitale Lernwelten. Konzepte, Beispiele und Perspektiven, pp. 245–268. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (2010)Google Scholar
  7. Liou, H.-C., Peng, Z.-Y.: Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System 37(2009), 514–525 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Münch, R., Baier, C.: Die Konstruktion der soziologischen Realität durch Forschungsrating. Berliner J. für Soziologie 2009(19), 295–313 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nagel, L., Kotzé, T.G.: Supersizing e-learning: What a CoI survey reveals about teaching presence in a large online class. Internet High. Educ. 13, 45–51 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Neidhardt, W.: Selbststeuerung der Wissenschaft: Peer Review. In: Simon, D., Knie, A., Hornbostel, S. (Hrsg.) Handbuch Wissenschaftspolitik, pp. 280–292. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden (2010)Google Scholar
  11. Reinmann, G., Sippel, S., Spannagel, C.: Peer Review für Forschen und Lernen. Funktionen, Formen, Entwicklungschancen und die Rolle der digitalen Medien. In: Mandel, S., Rutishauser, M., Seiler Schiedt, E. (Hrsg.) Digitale Medien für Lehre und Forschung, pp. 218–229. Waxmann Verlag, Münster (2010)Google Scholar
  12. Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Hirst, T., Mor, Y., Gaved, M., Whitelock, D.: Innovating Pedagogy 2012: Open University Innovation Report 1, Milton Keynes: The Open University (2012)Google Scholar
  13. Trautmann, N.M.: Interactive learning through web-mediated peer review of student science reports. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 57(5), 685–704 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zenha-Rela, M., Carvalho, R.: Work in progress: self evaluation through monitored peer review using the moodle platform. In: 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Diego, CA, Session T2D, pp. 26–27 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Johannes Kepler University LinzLinzAustria
  2. 2.Magdeburg-Stendal University of Applied SciencesStendalGermany

Personalised recommendations