Web 2.0-Based Peer Assessment: Padlet as a Digital Feedback Environment

Year 2025, Volume: 15 Issue: 2, 211 - 235, 31.12.2025

Handan Kocabatmaz , Gülçin Kezban Saraçoğlu

https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.1779495

Abstract

This study examines the pedagogical potential of Web 2.0–based digital peer assessment through the example of Padlet, demonstrating how digital tools transform assessment processes. Designed as a qualitative case study, the research investigates the integration and effectiveness of Padlet in the peer assessment process within an English language course. The study was conducted with one English teacher and twenty-seven seventh-grade students at a public middle school in the Mamak district of Ankara. Padlet was deliberately selected among Web 2.0 tools due to its pedagogical and practical advantages. Data was collected through a semi-structured interview with the teacher and three focus group interviews with students. Within the scope of content analysis, the data were independently coded by two researchers, and a Cohen’s Kappa coefficient of 0.85 indicated a high level of inter-code reliability. The resulting codes were analytically reclassified according to the four levels of the SAMR model. The findings indicate that Padlet-supported peer assessment reduces time and space constraints, ensures the retention of feedback, and supports continuous assessment. Anonymity reduced social pressure and enabled more honest evaluations. Students reported improvements in critical thinking, comparison, and self-regulation skills, while the teacher emphasized the platform’s usefulness in monitoring participation and structuring the assessment process. Overall, Padlet aligns with all levels of the SAMR model, transforming peer assessment into a more collaborative and student-centered learning experience.

Keywords

Peer assessment , Padlet , Critical Thinking Development , SAMR model , Educational technology

Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Review Board of Gazi University, and all procedures were conducted in accordance with the approved ethical protocols and the implementation permission granted by the Ankara Provincial Directorate of National Education. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents of participating students prior to the study, and participants were informed that their anonymized data would be used for publication purposes.

References

• Acai, F. E., & Purnamaningwulan, R. A. (2022). Comparing students’ attitudes in an online peer assessment: Does anonymity matter? Academic Journal Perspective: Education, Language, and Literature, 10(2), 147. https://doi.org/10.33603/perspective.v10i2.7727
• Aljanabi HM, Belal S, Breboneria BJ, Alrajeh ABM, Ghaly AS, Aljaber NY. (2024). Using Digital Technologies to Promote Nursing Students' Learning in the Connected Classroom. Preprint posted May 8, 2024. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4289285/v1
• Aneros, N. (2023). The use of Padlet to enhance Japanese learners' collaborative learning of basic composition writing skills (sakubun). Japanedu Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran Bahasa Jepang, 8(1), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.17509/japanedu.v8i1.52202
• Ardini, S. (2023). Enhancing writing report texts using Padlet website: The perceptions. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 11(4), 923. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v11i4.8316
• Balta, N., Japashov, N., Mansurova, A., Tzafilkou, K., Oliveira, A. W., & Lathrop, R. (2023). Middle‐ and secondary‐school students' STEM career interest and its relationship to gender, grades, and family size in Kazakhstan. Science Education, 107(2), 401-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21776
• Brehaut, J. C., Colquhoun, H. L., Eva, K. W., Carroll, K., Sales, A., Michie, S., Ivers, N., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2016). Practice feedback interventions: 15 suggestions for optimizing effectiveness. Annals of Internal Medicine, 164(6), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-2248
• Burgess, A., & Mellis, C. (2015). Feedback and assessment for clinical placements: Achieving the right balance. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 6, 373–381. https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.s77890
• Bushell, G. (2006). Moderation of peer assessment in group projects. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500262395
• Curran, V. R., Fairbridge, N. A., & Deacon, D. (2020). Peer assessment of professionalism in undergraduate medical education. BMC Medical Education, 20(504), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02412-x
• Çil, O. (2022). Preservice elementary teachers’ perspectives around the peer assessment process during an academic poster session. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.1034111
• Ertmer, P. A., & Koehler, A. A. (2023). Using Peerceptiv for peer assessment: Impacts on preservice teacher writing and reflection. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(1), 72–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221130918
• Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. Routledge Falmer.
• Fisher, C. D. (2017). Padlet: An online tool for learner engagement and collaboration. https://padlet.com
• Fuchs, B. (2014). The writing is on the wall: Using Padlet for whole-class engagement. Loex Quarterly, 40(4), 4. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/libraries_present/80/
• Gawin, D. F. (2021). Padlet for project-based learning in an entrepreneurship course. Journal of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development, 7(2), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.33736/jcshd.3329.2021
• Gill-Simmen, L. (2021). Using Padlet in instructional design to promote cognitive engagement: A case study of undergraduate marketing students. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (20), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi20.575
• Halimah, D. N., & Nawangsih, E. (2021). Studi deskriptif mengenai happiness pada mahasiswa pengguna media sosial di Kota Bandung. Journal Psikologi, 1(1), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.29313/jrp.v1i1.87
• Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H., & Thorpe, L. P. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 117–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567069.2011.586677
• Hwang, G. J., Kuo, F. R., Yin, P. Y., & Chuang, K. H. (2010). A heuristic algorithm for planning personalized learning paths for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 54, 404–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.024
• Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (7th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Karsenti, T., & Bugmann, J. (2017, July). Exploring the educational potential of Minecraft: The case of 118 elementary-school students. International Conference on Educational Technologies, Lisbon, Portugal. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED579314.pdf
• Kharis, K., Dameria, C. N., & Ebner, M. (2020). Perception and acceptance of Padlet as a microblogging platform for writing skills. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 14(13), 213. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v14i13.14493
• Lin, G. (2016). Effects that Facebook-based online peer assessment with micro-teaching videos can have on attitudes toward peer assessment and perceived learning from peer assessment. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), 2295–2307. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1280a
• Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications.
• McLuckie, J., & Topping, K. J. (2004). Transferable skills for online peer learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(5), 563–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930410001689144
• Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass.
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Nadeem, N. (2019). Students’ perceptions about the impact of using Padlet on class engagement: An exploratory case study. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 72–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2019100105
• Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
• O’Malley, J. M., & Valdez Pierce, L. (2005). Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. Pearson Education.
• Orabah, S. S. B., Bijani, H., & Ismail, S. M. (2022). Assessing English language teachers’ understanding and practices of student-centered learning in Oman. Language Testing in Asia, 12(41), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00184-3
• Panadero, E., & Brown, G. T. L. (2017). Teachers' reasons for using peer assessment: Positive experience predicts use. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0282-5
• Panadero, E., & Alqassab, M. (2019). An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assessment, peer feedback, peer review, peer evaluation and peer grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(8), 1253–1278. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1600186
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489-497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
• Puentedura, R. (2014). Learning, technology, and the SAMR model: Goals, processes, and practice [Blog post]. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/06/09/
• Raes, A., Vanderhoven, E., & Schellens, T. (2013). Increasing anonymity in peer assessment by using classroom response technology within face-to-face higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 40(1), 178–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.823930
• Selwyn, N. (2011). Digitally distanced learning: A study of international distance learners’ (non) use of technology. Distance Education, 32(1), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2011.565500
• Speyer, R., Pilz, W., Van Der Kruis, J., & Brunings, J. W. (2011). Reliability and validity of student peer assessment in medical education: A systematic review. Medical Teacher, 33(11), e572–e585. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2011.610835
• Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE.
• Sugiarni, R., Herman, T., Suryadi, D., Prabawanto, S., & Jusniani, N. (2025). Learning obstacle of proportion learning based on proposional reasoning level: A case study pre-service mathematics teachers. Jurnal Elemen, 11(1), 87-107. https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v11i1.27418
• Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569
• Topping, K. (2021). Peer assessment: Channels of operation. Education Sciences, 11(3), 91, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030091
• Udvaros, J., Gubán, M., Gubán, Á., & Sándor, Á. (2023). Industry 4.0 from the perspective of Education 4.0. International Journal of Advanced Natural Sciences and Engineering Researches, 7(4), 230–234. https://doi.org/10.59287/ijanser.705
• Uğraş, M. (2024). The effects of STEM activities on STEM attitudes, scientific creativity and motivation beliefs of the students and their views on STEM education. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(5), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2018.05.012
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
• Wang, J. (2024). Enhancing English writing proficiency in TESOL: Integrating traditional and technological approaches for a multifaceted learning experience. SHS Web of Conferences, 185, 01014. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202418501014
• Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X09349791
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (12. baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE.
• Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners' use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 15(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002