다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기
인지과학 = Korean journal of cognitive science, v.29 no.2, 2018년, pp.85 - 104
박주용 (서울대학교 심리학과 & 심리과학 연구소) , 박정애 (서울대학교 심리학과 & 심리과학 연구소)
AI-Helper
Peer assessment in educational setting, refers to activities in which students provide grades or comments on other students' accomplishments such as writing, presentation, or performances. In case of writing, peer assessment can allow instructors to give out more writing assignments, which were ofte...
| 핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
|---|---|---|
| 교수들이 동료평가에 대해 학생보다 더 큰 거부감을 보이는 이유는? | 만일 교수들이 거부감을 보이지 않았다면, 설사 학생들이 싫어하더라도, 교육 효과를 위해 이 방법을 썼을 가능성이 높다. 교수들은 왜 거부감을 보일까? 사실 교수들은 동료평가라 거부감을 보이기보다는 거의 모든 새로운 교수법에 대해 기본적으로 거부감을 보인다. 가장 오래된 방법인 강의법이, 학습에 크게 도움이 되지 않는다는 많은 실증적 연구에도 불구하고 (Bligh, 1972), 여전히 가장 널리 사용되는 이유가 바로 이 거부감 때문일 수 있다. 여기에 동료평가가 얼마나 정확한 지에 대해 충분히 신뢰하지 못한다. | |
| 동료평가란? | 동료평가란 학생들이 다른 학생의 글, 발표, 집단 활동과 같은 평가 대상이 될 수 있는 모든 결과물이나 수행 과정에 대해 점수를 매기거나 의견을 제공하는 활동을 가리킨다. 동료평가는 채점부담으로 인해 잘 활용되지 않는 글쓰기 기회를 늘릴 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 평가를 하는 과정을 통해 학습도 향상시킬 수 있다는 장점이 있다. | |
| 동료평가의 장점은? | 동료평가란 학생들이 다른 학생의 글, 발표, 집단 활동과 같은 평가 대상이 될 수 있는 모든 결과물이나 수행 과정에 대해 점수를 매기거나 의견을 제공하는 활동을 가리킨다. 동료평가는 채점부담으로 인해 잘 활용되지 않는 글쓰기 기회를 늘릴 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 평가를 하는 과정을 통해 학습도 향상시킬 수 있다는 장점이 있다. 본 개관 논문에서는, 주요 동료평가 시스템과 동료평가를 사용한 경험적 연구 결과를 소개한 다음, 동료평가 확산의 장애 요인을 살펴보고, 앞으로의 연구에서 해결되어야 할 과제가 논의되었다. |
노정혜, 전헌수, 김상현, 이철범, 이준호, 허영숙, 홍성욱, 박주용, 곽지훈, 윤창규 (2016). 학문의 정직성에 관한 명예서약 제도 도입을 위한 정책연구 보고서. 서울대학교 자연과학대학.
박주용 (2017). 대학 수업에서부터 시작하는 대한민국 교육개혁. 철학과 현실, 113, 126-150.
배수정, 박주용 (2016). 대학 수업에서 누적 동료평가 점수를 활용한 성적 산출 방법의 타당성. 인지과학, 27(2), 221-245.
연합뉴스 2014.11.4. 한국 아동 '삶의 만족도' OECD 최하위
이현정 (2017). 채점예시답안이 동료평가의 정확성에 미치는 영향, 서울대학교 석사학위논문.
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.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
Bligh, D. (1972). What's the use of lectures? Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.
Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
Bloxham, S., den-Outer, B., Hudson J., & Price, M. (2016). Let's stop the pretence of consistent marking: Exploring the multiple limitations of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 466-481.
Cho, K., Schunn, C.D., & Wilson, R.W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891-901.
Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL Students' writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61-84.
Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360.
Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. The Journal of the learning sciences, 19(1), 54-98.
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.
Finlayson, D.S. (1951). The reliability of the marking of essays. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 21(2), 126-134.
Hafner, J., & Hafner, P. (2003). Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: An empirical study of student peer-group rating. International Journal of Science Education, 25(12), 1509-1528.
Hunter, K., & Docherty, P. (2011). Reducing variation in the assessment of student writing. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 109-124.
Jeffery, D., Yankulov, K., Crerar, A., & Ritchie, K. (2016). How to achieve accurate peer assessment for high value written assignments in a senior undergraduate course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 127-140.
Johnson, R. L., Penny, J., Gordon, B., Shumate, S. R., & Fisher, S. P. (2005). Resolving score differences in the rating of writing samples: Does discussion improve the accuracy of scores? Language Assessment Quarterly, 2(2), 117-146.
Joordens, S., Pare, D.E., & Pruesse, K. (2009). peerScholar: An evidence-based online peer-assessment tool supporting critical thinking and clear communication. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on e-Learning (pp. 236-240).
Li, H., Xiong, Y., Zang, X., Kornhaber, M.L., Lyu, Y., Chung K.S., & Suen, H.K. (2016). Peer assessment in the digital age: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 245-264.
Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(3), 275-292.
Liu, X., li, L., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Small group discussion as a key component in online assessment training for enhanced student learning in web-based peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 207-222.
Park, J. (2017). ClassPrep: A peer review system for class preparation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 511-523.
Purchase, H., & Hamer, J. (2018). Perspectives on peer-review: Eight years of Aropa. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 473-487.
Resnick, L. (1986). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
Roediger, H. L, Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011). Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In B. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55. Academic Press.
Russell J., van Horne, S. V., Ward, A. S., Bettis III, E. A., & Gikonyo, J. (2017). Variability in students' evaluating processes in peer assessment with calibrated peer review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 178-190.
Sadler, P. M., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1-31.
Schunn, C., Godley, A., & De Martino, S. (2016). The reliability and validity of peer review of writing in high school AP English classes. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(1). 13-23.
Singleton-Jackson, J. A., Jackson, D. L., & Reinhardt, J. (2010). Students as consumers of knowledge: Are they buying what we're selling? Innovation in Higher Education, 35(5), 343-358.
Sluijsmans, D.M.A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merrienboer, J.J.G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 443-454.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Tsai, Y. C., & Chuang, M. T. (2013). Fostering revision of argumentative writing through structured peer assessment. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 116(1) 210-221.
Van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Peer assessment in university teaching: Evaluating seven course designs. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 19-36.
Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merrienboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279.
Wenglinsky, H. (2002). The link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10, 12.
Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students' performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. The Internet and Higher Education. 11(3-4), 186-193.
Yucel, R., Bird, F. L., Young, J., & Blanksby, T. (2014). The road to self-assessment: Exemplar marking before peer review develops first-year students' capacity to judge the quality of a scientific report. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 971-986.
Zheng, L. Cui, P., Li, X., & Huang, R. (2018). Synchronous discussion between assessors and assessees in web-based peer assessment: Impact on writing performance, feedback quality, meta-cognitive awareness and self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 500-514.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
출판사/학술단체 등이 한시적으로 특별한 프로모션 또는 일정기간 경과 후 접근을 허용하여, 출판사/학술단체 등의 사이트에서 이용 가능한 논문
Copyright KISTI. All Rights Reserved.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.