TY - JOUR T1 - Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives Around the Peer Assessment Process During an Academic Poster Session TT - Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Akademik Poster Sunumu Sırasındaki Akran Değerlendirme Sürecine Yönelik Görüşleri AU - Çil, Osman PY - 2022 DA - March DO - 10.31592/aeusbed.1034111 JF - Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi PB - Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi WT - DergiPark SN - 2149-0767 SP - 317 EP - 334 VL - 8 IS - 1 LA - en AB - The use of peer assessment activities is increasing; however, students might not always be willing or feel comfortable to implement these activities. The main goal of this qualitative study was the exploration of preservice elementary teachers’ perspectives around the implementation of peer assessment process during an academic poster session. For this purpose, a questionnaire consisting of open-ended questions, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were utilized for data gathering purposes with 87 preservice elementary teachers in Turkey. The preservice elementary teachers’ concerns regarding their peers’ reactions, symbiotic agreements and any previous personal relationships between the participants were the main factors that led to their subjectivity while evaluating their peers. They defined instructors as more experienced and objective and expressed their trust towards teacher rating. The preservice elementary teachers’ performance during the peer assessment process, and their perspective towards subjectivity highlighted the risk of using peer assessment process as a summative assessment tool. KW - Peer assessment KW - Poster Session KW - Subjectivity N2 - Akran değerlendirme uygulamalarının yükseköğretimdeki kullanımı gün geçtikçe artmakta olmasına rağmen; öğretmen adayları bu uygulamalar sırasında kendilerini rahat hissetmeyebilir ve bu etkinliklere katılmakta isteksizlik gösterebilir. Bu nitel araştırmanın temel amacı, sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının akran değerlendirme sürecine yönelik görüşlerinin incelenmesidir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, açık uçlu sorularla hazırlanmış anketler ve yarı yapılandırılmış bireysel ve odak grup görüşmeleri kullanılarak toplamda Türkiye'de bir üniversitede eğitim gören 87 sınıf öğretmeni adayından veri toplanmıştır. Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının akranlarının tepkilerine, karşılıklı çıkara dayalı ve daha önce yaşanan kişisel ilişkilere ilişkin endişeleri, akranlarını değerlendirirken subjektif kararlar verilmelerine yol açan temel faktörler olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Buna ek olarak, sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının dersin eğitmenlerini daha deneyimli ve objektif olarak tanımladıkları ve öğretmen değerlendirmesine duydukları güveni dile getirdikleri görülmüştür. Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının akran değerlendirme sürecindeki performansları ve subjektif bakış açıları, akran değerlendirmesinin düzey belirleyici bir değerlendirme aracı olarak kullanılmasının riskini vurgulamaktadır. CR - Ashenafi, M. M. (2017). Peer-assessment in higher education–twenty-first century practices, challenges and the way forward. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 226-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1100711 CR - Badea, G., & Popescu, E. (2019, October). Instructor support module in a web-based peer assessment platform. In 2019 23rd International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC) Sinaia, Romania. CR - Bostock, Stephen. 2000. Student peer assessment. https://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/engageinassessment/Student_peer_assessment_-_Stephen_Bostock.pdf. CR - Boud, D. (2007). Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (pp, 24-36). London: Routledge. CR - Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long‐term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/02602930600679050 CR - Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2007). Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. London: Routledge. CR - Brindley, C., & Scoffield, S. (1998). Peer assessment in undergraduate programmes. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(1), 79-90. CR - Carvalho, A. (2013). Students' perceptions of fairness in peer assessment: Evidence from a problem-based learning course. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(5), 491-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.753051 CR - Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. CR - Creswell, J. W. (2013). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Delhi, India: PHI Learning. CR - Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070003287 CR - Fook, C. Y., & G. K. Sidhu. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153-161. CR - Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 344-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005 CR - Li, L., & Gao, F. (2016). The effect of peer assessment on project performance of students at different learning levels. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 885-900. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1048185 CR - Lincoln, Y. S., & E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage Publications. CR - Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290 https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680582 CR - Hamodi, C., López-Pastor, V. M., & López-Pastor, A. T. (2017). If I experience formative assessment whilst studying at university, will I put it into practice later as a teacher? Formative and shared assessment in Initial Teacher Education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 171-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1281909 CR - Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T., & Dargusch, J. (2018). Not playing the game: Student assessment resistance as a form of agency. The Australian Educational Researcher, 45(1), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-018-0264-0. CR - Magin, D. (2001). Reciprocity as a source of bias in multiple peer assessment of group work. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070020030715 CR - McGarr, O., & Clifford, A. M. (2013). ‘Just enough to make you take it seriously’: Exploring students’ attitudes towards peer assessment. Higher Education, 65(6), 677-693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9570-z CR - Medland, E. (2016). Assessment in higher education: Drivers, barriers and directions for change in the UK. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.982072 CR - David, N., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518 CR - Pope, N. (2001). An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(3), 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120052396 CR - Ryan, G. J., Marshall, L. L., Porter, K., & Jia, H. (2007). Peer, professor and self-evaluation of class participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787407074049 CR - Sadler, P. M., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self-and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1101_1 CR - Segers, M., & Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value-added of the students’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070120076291 CR - Holly, S., Cooper, A., & Lancaster, L. (2002). Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13558000110102904 CR - Struyven, K., Dochy, F. & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about new modes of assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 331-347. CR - Sun, D. L., Harris, N., Walther, G., & Baiocchi, M. (2015). Peer assessment enhances student learning: The results of a matched randomized crossover experiment in a college statistics class. PloS one, 10(12), e0143177. CR - Topping, K. (2010). Methodological quandaries in studying process and outcomes in peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 339-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003 Topping, K. (2017). Peer assessment: Learning by judging and discussing the work of other learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 1(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.31532/InterdiscipEducPsychol.1.1.007 CR - Vu, T. T., & Dall’Alba, G. (2007). Students’ experience of peer assessment in a professional course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(5), 541-556. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930601116896 CR - Watkins, D., Bo D., & Ekholm, M. (2005). Awareness of the backwash effect of assessment: A phenomenographic study of the views of Hong Kong and Swedish lecturers. Instructional Science, 33(4), 283-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-3002-8 CR - Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. UR - https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.1034111 L1 - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/2121697 ER -