Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Akademik Poster Sunumu Sırasındaki Akran Değerlendirme Sürecine Yönelik Görüşleri

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akran değerlendirmesi
• Poster Sunumu
• Subjektivite

Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives Around the Peer Assessment Process During an Academic Poster Session

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Peer assessment
• Poster Session
• Subjectivity

Kaynakça

1. 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
2. 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.
3. Bostock, Stephen. 2000. Student peer assessment. https://www.reading.ac.uk/web/files/engageinassessment/Student_peer_assessment_-_Stephen_Bostock.pdf.
4. 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.
5. 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
6. Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2007). Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. London: Routledge.
7. Brindley, C., & Scoffield, S. (1998). Peer assessment in undergraduate programmes. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(1), 79-90.
8. 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

9. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
10. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Delhi, India: PHI Learning.
11. 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
12. Fook, C. Y., & G. K. Sidhu. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153-161.
13. 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
14. 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
15. Lincoln, Y. S., & E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage Publications.
16. 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
17. 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
18. 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.
19. 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
20. 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
21. 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
22. 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
23. 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
24. 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
25. 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
26. 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
27. 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
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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
31. 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
32. 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
33. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.