Skip to main content

Paradoxical tensions of online peer assessment: A case study of a secondary school in Singapore

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Emerging Issues in Smart Learning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Educational Technology ((LNET))

  • 4970 Accesses

Abstract

Despite its potential benefits, factors such as negative perceptions have affected the use of peer assessment in schools. Through applying the concept of ‘paradoxes’, we sought to identify contradictory yet interwoven elements that were inherent in web-mediated peer assessment practices. Applying a phenomenographical approach, we interviewed 6 teachers and 30 students in a secondary school in Singapore, where an online peer assessment tool was used to support students in their English classes. Our findings suggested four main paradoxes: (1) increased student ownership but reduction in teachers’ sense of control over student learning; (2) anonymity of peer comments lowered students’ anxiety but reduced accountability; (3) reviewing multiple peers’ essays increased student feedback but gave rise to more contradictory and nonconstructive comments; and (4) the online peer assessment tool provided a good platform for peer review but overemphasised on the outcomes rather than processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48, 20-27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. (2011). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39, 387-406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, L. and Steckelberg, A. L. (2006). Perceptions of web-mediated peer assessment. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(2). 265-270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orzolek, D. C. (2006). The paradox of assessment: Assessment as paradox [Electronic version]. Research and Issues in Music Education, 4. Retrieved April 1, 2011 from http://www.stthomas.edu/rimeonline/vol4/orzolek.htm

  • Colwell, R. (2003). The status of arts assessment. Examples from music. Arts Education Policy Review, 105(2), 10-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriopoulos, C. (2003). Six Paradoxes in Managing Creativity: An Embracing Act. Long Range Planning, 26, 375–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y.-F., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(1), 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zevenbergen, R. (2001). Peer assessment of student constructed posters: assessment alternatives in preservice mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4 (2), 95-113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaman, R. (1998) The unquiet…even loud andragogy! Alternative assessments for adult learners. Innovative Higher Education, 23(1), 47-59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangert, A.W., (1995), Peer assessment: An instructional strategy for effectively implementing performance-based assessment, Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 3505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douchy, F., Segers, M., & Slujismans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education. 24 . 331-350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Student Attitudes toward Networked Peer Assessment: Case Studies of Undergraduate Students and Senior High School Students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 241-254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanrahan, S. and Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment: the students’ views.Higher Education Research and Development, 20(1), pp.53-71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, N. and Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), pp.279-290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K. & MacArthur, C. (2010) Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers and Education, 48(3), 409-426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderhoven, E., Raes, A., Schellens, T., & Montrieux, H. (2012). Face-to-face peer assessment in secondary education: does anonymity matter? In Z. Bekirogullari (Ed.), Procedia: Social & Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1340–1347. Presented at the 3rd International Conference on Education & Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2012), Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J.-W. & Sluijsmans, D. (2010). Unraveling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 265–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. H. & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Students’ interpersonal perspectives on, conceptions of and approaches to learning in online peer assessment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 599-618. Retrieved online from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet28/chengkh. html on April 1, 2014.

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and Awareness. New Jersey: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wan Ying Tay .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tay, W.Y., Ng, Z.Y. (2015). Paradoxical tensions of online peer assessment: A case study of a secondary school in Singapore. In: Chen, G., Kumar, V., Kinshuk, ., Huang, R., Kong, S. (eds) Emerging Issues in Smart Learning. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_36

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics