University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects
This study explores the effects of feedback type, feedback occasion, and year level on student self-assessments in higher education. In total, 126 university students participated in this randomized experiment under three experimental conditions (i.e., rubric feedback, instructor’s written feedback,...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of psychology of education 2023-09, Vol.38 (3), p.1031-1051 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1051 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 1031 |
| container_title | European journal of psychology of education |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Panadero, Ernesto Pérez, Daniel García Ruiz, Javier Fernández Fraile, Juan Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván Brown, Gavin T. L. |
| description | This study explores the effects of feedback type, feedback occasion, and year level on student self-assessments in higher education. In total, 126 university students participated in this randomized experiment under three experimental conditions (i.e., rubric feedback, instructor’s written feedback, and rubric feedback plus instructor’s written feedback). Participants, after random assignment to feedback condition, were video-recorded performing a self-assessment on a writing task both before and after receiving feedback. The quality of self-assessment strategies decreased after feedback of all kinds, but the number of strategies increased for the combined feedback condition. The number of self-assessment criteria increased for rubric and combined conditions, while feedback helped shift criteria use from basic to advanced criteria. Student year level was not systematically related to changes in self-assessment after feedback. In general, the combination of rubric and instructor’s feedback produced the best effects. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2917923476</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1390442</ericid><sourcerecordid>2917923476</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-f2806b92adf0394d53ee83c61c4dfea5d199cfd86d6d59b6a3434da919f5e2713</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMlKBDEQhoMoOC4vIAgBr7Zm6yXeRFwRvOg5ZJKKRMeeMZUW5qSv4ev5JEZb9OahqIKq7y_4CNnh7IAz1h4iZ4KLiolSrJG6Uitkwru2q2reqlUyYaJuKqFFt042EB8YE1JqOSGvd318gYQxLynmwUOf8ePtvczJZriPgNT2nroUM6RoqR9S7O8pwixUFhEQnwpyRGNfiMHleSo00gDgp9Y97tM0TFN0uP8dswSb6AxeYEYhBHAZt8hasDOE7Z--Se7OTm9PLqrrm_PLk-PrysmuzlUQHWumWlgfmNTK1xKgk67hTvkAtvZcaxd81_jG13raWKmk8lZzHWoQLZebZG_MXaT58wCYzcN8SH15aYTmrRZStU25EuOVS3PEBMEsUnyyaWk4M1-izSjaFNHmW7RRBdodoSLI_QKnV1xqppQoeznucfHlDtLf639SPwHSl47p</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2917923476</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Panadero, Ernesto ; Pérez, Daniel García ; Ruiz, Javier Fernández ; Fraile, Juan ; Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván ; Brown, Gavin T. L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Panadero, Ernesto ; Pérez, Daniel García ; Ruiz, Javier Fernández ; Fraile, Juan ; Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván ; Brown, Gavin T. L.</creatorcontrib><description>This study explores the effects of feedback type, feedback occasion, and year level on student self-assessments in higher education. In total, 126 university students participated in this randomized experiment under three experimental conditions (i.e., rubric feedback, instructor’s written feedback, and rubric feedback plus instructor’s written feedback). Participants, after random assignment to feedback condition, were video-recorded performing a self-assessment on a writing task both before and after receiving feedback. The quality of self-assessment strategies decreased after feedback of all kinds, but the number of strategies increased for the combined feedback condition. The number of self-assessment criteria increased for rubric and combined conditions, while feedback helped shift criteria use from basic to advanced criteria. Student year level was not systematically related to changes in self-assessment after feedback. In general, the combination of rubric and instructor’s feedback produced the best effects.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0256-2928</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-5174</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Age Differences ; College Students ; Control Groups ; Education ; Educational Change ; Educational Psychology ; Evaluation Criteria ; Feedback ; Feedback (Response) ; Higher education ; Learning ; Learning Processes ; Outcomes of Education ; Pedagogic Psychology ; Primary Education ; Scoring Rubrics ; Secondary education ; Self evaluation ; Self Evaluation (Individuals) ; Teacher education ; Undergraduate Students ; University students ; Video Technology</subject><ispartof>European journal of psychology of education, 2023-09, Vol.38 (3), p.1031-1051</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-f2806b92adf0394d53ee83c61c4dfea5d199cfd86d6d59b6a3434da919f5e2713</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-f2806b92adf0394d53ee83c61c4dfea5d199cfd86d6d59b6a3434da919f5e2713</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5419-7687</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1390442$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Panadero, Ernesto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pérez, Daniel García</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruiz, Javier Fernández</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraile, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Gavin T. L.</creatorcontrib><title>University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects</title><title>European journal of psychology of education</title><addtitle>Eur J Psychol Educ</addtitle><description>This study explores the effects of feedback type, feedback occasion, and year level on student self-assessments in higher education. In total, 126 university students participated in this randomized experiment under three experimental conditions (i.e., rubric feedback, instructor’s written feedback, and rubric feedback plus instructor’s written feedback). Participants, after random assignment to feedback condition, were video-recorded performing a self-assessment on a writing task both before and after receiving feedback. The quality of self-assessment strategies decreased after feedback of all kinds, but the number of strategies increased for the combined feedback condition. The number of self-assessment criteria increased for rubric and combined conditions, while feedback helped shift criteria use from basic to advanced criteria. Student year level was not systematically related to changes in self-assessment after feedback. In general, the combination of rubric and instructor’s feedback produced the best effects.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Age Differences</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Control Groups</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Educational Change</subject><subject>Educational Psychology</subject><subject>Evaluation Criteria</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Feedback (Response)</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning Processes</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Pedagogic Psychology</subject><subject>Primary Education</subject><subject>Scoring Rubrics</subject><subject>Secondary education</subject><subject>Self evaluation</subject><subject>Self Evaluation (Individuals)</subject><subject>Teacher education</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>University students</subject><subject>Video Technology</subject><issn>0256-2928</issn><issn>1878-5174</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMlKBDEQhoMoOC4vIAgBr7Zm6yXeRFwRvOg5ZJKKRMeeMZUW5qSv4ev5JEZb9OahqIKq7y_4CNnh7IAz1h4iZ4KLiolSrJG6Uitkwru2q2reqlUyYaJuKqFFt042EB8YE1JqOSGvd318gYQxLynmwUOf8ePtvczJZriPgNT2nroUM6RoqR9S7O8pwixUFhEQnwpyRGNfiMHleSo00gDgp9Y97tM0TFN0uP8dswSb6AxeYEYhBHAZt8hasDOE7Z--Se7OTm9PLqrrm_PLk-PrysmuzlUQHWumWlgfmNTK1xKgk67hTvkAtvZcaxd81_jG13raWKmk8lZzHWoQLZebZG_MXaT58wCYzcN8SH15aYTmrRZStU25EuOVS3PEBMEsUnyyaWk4M1-izSjaFNHmW7RRBdodoSLI_QKnV1xqppQoeznucfHlDtLf639SPwHSl47p</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Panadero, Ernesto</creator><creator>Pérez, Daniel García</creator><creator>Ruiz, Javier Fernández</creator><creator>Fraile, Juan</creator><creator>Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván</creator><creator>Brown, Gavin T. L.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5419-7687</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects</title><author>Panadero, Ernesto ; Pérez, Daniel García ; Ruiz, Javier Fernández ; Fraile, Juan ; Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván ; Brown, Gavin T. L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-f2806b92adf0394d53ee83c61c4dfea5d199cfd86d6d59b6a3434da919f5e2713</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Age Differences</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Control Groups</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Educational Change</topic><topic>Educational Psychology</topic><topic>Evaluation Criteria</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Feedback (Response)</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning Processes</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Pedagogic Psychology</topic><topic>Primary Education</topic><topic>Scoring Rubrics</topic><topic>Secondary education</topic><topic>Self evaluation</topic><topic>Self Evaluation (Individuals)</topic><topic>Teacher education</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>University students</topic><topic>Video Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Panadero, Ernesto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pérez, Daniel García</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruiz, Javier Fernández</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fraile, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Gavin T. L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>European journal of psychology of education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Panadero, Ernesto</au><au>Pérez, Daniel García</au><au>Ruiz, Javier Fernández</au><au>Fraile, Juan</au><au>Sánchez-Iglesias, Iván</au><au>Brown, Gavin T. L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1390442</ericid><atitle>University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects</atitle><jtitle>European journal of psychology of education</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Psychol Educ</stitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1031</spage><epage>1051</epage><pages>1031-1051</pages><issn>0256-2928</issn><eissn>1878-5174</eissn><abstract>This study explores the effects of feedback type, feedback occasion, and year level on student self-assessments in higher education. In total, 126 university students participated in this randomized experiment under three experimental conditions (i.e., rubric feedback, instructor’s written feedback, and rubric feedback plus instructor’s written feedback). Participants, after random assignment to feedback condition, were video-recorded performing a self-assessment on a writing task both before and after receiving feedback. The quality of self-assessment strategies decreased after feedback of all kinds, but the number of strategies increased for the combined feedback condition. The number of self-assessment criteria increased for rubric and combined conditions, while feedback helped shift criteria use from basic to advanced criteria. Student year level was not systematically related to changes in self-assessment after feedback. In general, the combination of rubric and instructor’s feedback produced the best effects.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5419-7687</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0256-2928 |
| ispartof | European journal of psychology of education, 2023-09, Vol.38 (3), p.1031-1051 |
| issn | 0256-2928 1878-5174 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2917923476 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Academic achievement Age Differences College Students Control Groups Education Educational Change Educational Psychology Evaluation Criteria Feedback Feedback (Response) Higher education Learning Learning Processes Outcomes of Education Pedagogic Psychology Primary Education Scoring Rubrics Secondary education Self evaluation Self Evaluation (Individuals) Teacher education Undergraduate Students University students Video Technology |
| title | University students’ strategies and criteria during self-assessment: instructor’s feedback, rubrics, and year level effects |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T23%3A17%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=University%20students%E2%80%99%20strategies%20and%20criteria%20during%20self-assessment:%20instructor%E2%80%99s%20feedback,%20rubrics,%20and%20year%20level%20effects&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20psychology%20of%20education&rft.au=Panadero,%20Ernesto&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1031&rft.epage=1051&rft.pages=1031-1051&rft.issn=0256-2928&rft.eissn=1878-5174&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10212-022-00639-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2917923476%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2917923476&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1390442&rfr_iscdi=true |