Yükseköğretimde Öz ve Akran Değerlendirmelerinin Anlamlı Öğrenme Üzerine Etkisi

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 422 - 437, 20.09.2025

Müge Yurtsever Kılıçgün

https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.1727327

Öz

Bu araştırmada yükseköğretimde öz ve akran değerlendirme uygulamalarına katılımın öğrencilerin anlamlı öğrenme düzeyleri üzerindeki etki durumu incelenmiştir. Araştırma süreci nicel araştırma deseninde tasarlanmıştır. Öz ve akran değerlendirme süreçlerinin anlamlı öğrenme üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi için deneysel araştırma türlerinden tek grup ön test-son test yapısı kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunda yüksek öğretime devam eden 48 öğrenci yer almıştır. Araştırma sürecinde Katılımcı Bilgi Anketi, Anlamlı Öğrenme Öz-Farkındalık Ölçeği, Performans Görevi Kartı, Performans Görevi Dereceli Puanlama Anahtarı, Performans Değerlendirme Formu, Öz Değerlendirme Formu, Katılımcı Değerlendirme Formu ve Takım Üyesi Değerlendirme Formu kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubuna dair betimsel veriler; frekans (f), yüzde (%), aritmetik ortalama (x), standart sapma, basıklık ve çarpıklık değerleri olarak çözümlenmiştir. Öz ve akran değerlendirme uygulamalarının anlamlı öğrenme üzerindeki etkisi fark analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularına göre; öntest-sontest olarak uygulanan Anlamlı Öğrenme Öz-Farkındalık Ölçeği’nin hem ölçek alt boyutlarında hem de ölçek toplam puanında sontest lehine anlamlı bir farkın oluştuğu tespit edilmiştir. Görüldüğü üzere yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin sınıf içi etkinliklerine öz ve akran değerlendirme süreçlerinin dahil edilmesi; onların anlamlı öğrenme durumlarını olumlu yönde etkilemiştir. Bu araştırma kapsamında elde edilen bulgular ışığında yükseköğretim düzeyinde öz ve akran değerlendirme uygulamalarının anlamlı öğrenmeyi güçlendirdiği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yükseköğretim , biçimlendirici değerlendirme , öz değerlendirme , akran değerlendirmesi , anlamlı öğrenme

The Impact of Self and Peer Assessments on Meaningful Learning in Higher Education

Öz

This study described the effects of participation in self- and peer-assessment practices in higher education on students' meaningful learning levels. The research process was designed as a quantitative research design. In order to examine the effects of self- and peer-assessment processes on meaningful learning, a single group pre-test-post-test structure, one of the experimental research types, was used. The study group included 48 students continuing their higher education. Participant Information Survey, Meaningful Learning Self-Awareness Scale, Performance Task Card, Performance Task Rubric, Performance Evaluation Form, Self-Assessment Form, Participant Evaluation Form and Team Member Evaluation Form were used in the research process. Descriptive data regarding the study group of the study were analyzed as frequency (f), percentage (%), arithmetic mean (x), standard deviation, kurtosis and skewness values. The effects of self- and peer-assessment practices on meaningful learning were evaluated with difference analysis. According to the research findings; It was determined that a significant difference occurred in favor of the post-test in both the scale sub-dimensions and the scale total score of the Meaningful Learning Self-Awareness Scale applied as pre-test-post-test. As can be seen, the inclusion of self- and peer-assessment processes in the classroom activities of higher education students has positively affected their meaningful learning. In the light of the findings obtained within the scope of this research, it is thought that self- and peer-assessment practices at the higher education level strengthen meaningful learning.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Higher education , formative assessment , self-assessment , peer assessment , meaningful learning

Kaynakça

• Andrade, H. L., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801928
• Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(5), 267-272. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046669
• Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A cognitive View. Springer, Holland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7
• Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University (4th ed.). Open University Press. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
• Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Samspng, J. (2001). Peer learning and assesment, In Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from & with Each Other (pp.67-84). Kogan Page.
• Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2007). Learning assessment: students’ experiences in post-school qualifications. In Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term (pp.69-94. Routledge.
• Brown, G., & Harris, L. (2013). Student self-assessment. In SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment (pp. 367-393). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452218649
• Brown, S. (2005). Assessment for learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, (1), 81-89. https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/3607/
• Cheng, K.H., Liang, J.C. & Tsai, C.C. (2015). Examining the role of feedback messages in undergraduate students’ writing performance during an online peer assessment activity. Internet and Higher Education, 25(1), 78-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.001
• Cranmer, G. (2017). One-group pretest–posttest design. In The sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vol. 4, pp. 1125-1126). SAGE Publications, Inc, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411.n388
• Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
• Dochy, F., & McDowell, L. (1997). Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-491X(97)86211-6
• Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935
• Dutta, S., He, M., & Tsang, D. C. (2023). Reflection and peer assessment to promote self-directed learning in higher education. Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 11(3), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.33495/jerr_v11i3.23.111
• Falchikov, N. (2007). The place of peers in learning and assessment. In Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education (pp. 138-153). Routledge.
• 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/10.3102/00346543070003
• Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: Reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 229-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510120045212
• Kösterelioğlu, İ., & Çelen, Ü. (2016). Öz değerlendirme yönteminin etkililiğinin değerlendirilmesi. İlköğretim Online, 15(2), 671-681. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2016.44304
• 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
• McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40-49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42923742
• Meydan, H. (2018). Anlamlı öğrenme öz-farkındalık ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 16(36), 95-118.
• Nicol, D. (2014). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. In Approaches to Assessment that Enhance Learning in Higher Education (pp. 11-27). Routledge.
• 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
• Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2016). Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.002
• OECD (2013). Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en
• Özpınar, İ. (2021). Öz, Akran, Grup ve Öğretim Üyesi Değerlendirmesi: Öğretmen Yeterlikleri Penceresinden Bir Bakış. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 10(3), 949-973. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.754885
• Öztürk, M. (2017). Sürdürülebilir gelişme odaklı eğitim: Kuramsal çerçeve, tarihsel gelişim ve uygulamaya dönük öneriler. İlköğretim Online, 16(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.342997
• Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
• Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Botella, J. (2017). Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 22, 74-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.004
• Panadero, E., Fernández, J., Pinedo, L., Sánchez, I., & García-Pérez, D. (2024). A self-feedback model (SEFEMO): secondary and higher education students’ self-assessment profiles. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 31(3-4), 221-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2024.2367027
• Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., Pinedo, L., & Fernández-Castilla, B. (2023). Effects of rubrics on academic performance, self-regulated learning, and self-efficacy: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4), 113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09823-4
• Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). P21 Framework Definitions. http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21
• Shi, J., Mo, X., & Sun, Z. (2012). Content validity index in scale development. Journal of Central South University. Medical Sciences, 37(2), 152-155. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-7347.2012.02.007 
• Simonsmeier, B. A., Peiffer, H., Flaig, M., & Schneider, M. (2020). Peer feedback improves students’ academic self-concept in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 61(6), 706-724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09591-y
• Şahin, M. G., & Kalyon, D. Ş. (2018). Öğretmen adaylarının öz-akran-öğretmen değerlendirmesine ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(4), 1055-1068. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.393278
• Kim H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
• Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
• Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569
• Türkan, A., & Çetin, H. (2022). Sınıf öğretmen adaylarının ölçme ve değerlendirmede yaşanan sorunlara ilişkin görüşleri. Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(2), 164-173. https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.933764
• van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Design principles and outcomes of peer assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher education, 31(03), 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600680836
• van Ginkel, S., Gulikers, J., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2017). The impact of the feedback source on developing oral presentation competence. Studies in Higher Education, 42(9), 1671-1685. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1117064
• van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004
• Wang, H. H., Chen, H. T., Lin, H. S., & Hong, Z. R. (2017). The effects of college students’ positive thinking, learning motivation and self-regulation through a self-reflection intervention in Taiwan. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 201-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1176999
• Yan, Z. (2020). Self-assessment in the process of self-regulated learning and its relationship with academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 224-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1629390
• Yin, S., Chen, F., & Chang, H. (2022). Assessment as Learning: How Does Peer Assessment Function in Students’ Learning?. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 912568. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.912568
• Zariski, A. (1996, February). Student peer assessment in tertiary education: Promise, perils and practice. In Teaching and Learning Within and Across Disciplines (p189-200). Proceedings of the 5th Annual Teaching and Learning Forum, Murdoch University. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236627956_Exploring_The_Potentials_of_Peer_Assesment_for_Enhancing_the_Students’_Performances_in_a_Presentation_Subject
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky y A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp.299-315). New York: Routledge.