Reciprocal peer assessment as a learning tool for secondary school students in modeling-based learning

The aim of this study was to investigate how reciprocal peer assessment in modeling-based learning can serve as a learning tool for secondary school learners in a physics course. The participants were 22 upper secondary school students from a gymnasium in Switzerland. They were asked to model additive and subtractive color mixing in groups of two, after having completed hands-on experiments in the laboratory. Then, they submitted their models and anonymously assessed the model of another peer group. The students were given a four-point rating scale with pre-specified assessment criteria, while enacting the peer-assessor role. After implementation of the peer assessment, students, as peer assessees, were allowed to revise their models. They were also asked to complete a short questionnaire, reflecting on their revisions. Data were collected by (i) peer-feedback reports, (ii) students’ initial and revised models, (iii) post-instructional interviews with students, and (iv) students’ responses to open-ended questions. The data were analyzed qualitatively and then quantitatively. The results revealed that, after enactment of the peer assessment, students’ revisions of their models reflected a higher level of attainment toward their model-construction practices and a better conceptual understanding of additive and subtractive color mixing. The findings of this study suggest that reciprocal peer assessment, in which students experience both the role of assessor and assessee, facilitates students’ learning in science. Based on our findings, further research directions are suggested with respect to novel approaches to peer assessment for developing students’ modeling competence in science learning.     

Should first-year doctoral students be supervised collectively or individually? Effects on thesis completion and time to completion

Whether supervision of doctoral students is best pursued individually or collectively is a recurring but unresolved question in debates on higher education. The rarity of longitudinal data and the common usage of qualitative methods to analyse a limited number of cases have left the effectiveness of either model largely untested. To assist with overcoming these problems, this paper reports on a study of 145 individuals admitted to a specific doctoral programme between 1991 and 2014. It analyses the effects of either individual or collective supervision during the first year of the programme on the probability of thesis completion and the time to thesis completion. Group means, Cox regressions, Kaplan–Meir curves and Ordinary Least Square regressions are calculated on the basis of the number of months spent by each doctoral student in the programme without defending a thesis. Studied in these ways, it appears that collective supervision in the first year significantly increases the probability of thesis completion and decreases the time to thesis completion. Collective supervision may have this effect as it enhances peer learning, creates a wider academic learning context, allows doctoral students to gradually acquire the values and behaviours of a research practice community and reduces the risk of premature selection of permanent supervisors.     

Index to Volume XXXIX

Authors Index

Index to Volume XXXIX