Phase 2 findings
Impact of Student-To-Student Feedback on academic achievement
The goal of phase 2 was to examine how student-to-student feedback influenced academic achievement. I measured academic achievement by students’ performance on their transitional presentations of learning (TPOL).
Criteria for TPOLs
In order for students to pass their TPOL, students needed to meet the following criteria:
Marks for TPOLs
For assessing the TPOLs, I used the following marks:
Student academic performance on the TPOLs
Out of the 42 presentations, 16 received a mark of “exceeds,” 18 received a mark of “meets,” 5 received a mark of “meets with revisions to the digital portfolio,” and 3 needed to revise and present the presentation. Of those three students, 2 needed to present one of their claims, and 1 student needed to revise and present all three of his claims. The graph below depicts these results.
Criteria for TPOLs
In order for students to pass their TPOL, students needed to meet the following criteria:
- The student presented three claims with an original thesis statement for each claim. Example: I can master a difficult skill by using the steps found in the engineering design process.
- For each of the three claims, the student displayed two projects on their digital portfolio as evidence of their thesis statement.
- For each of the projects displayed on the digital portfolio, the student added reflections, links to websites, images of work samples, annotations, etc. to showcase their learning.
- For each of the three claims, the student explained in detail how at least one of the projects supported their thesis statement.
- For each of the three claims, the student explained how they will apply the skills they have acquired in the future.
Marks for TPOLs
For assessing the TPOLs, I used the following marks:
- Exceeds (E): The student met the five criteria with few clarifying and prompting questions from audience members.
- Meets (M): The student met the five criteria with significant clarifying and prompting questions from audience members.
- Meets with revisions to the digital portfolio (MDP): The student met the five criteria, but needed additional evidence or needed to reorganize their digital portfolio.
- Needs to revise the presentation (R): The student needs to revise one, two or three of the claims and present this updated TPOL at one of the designated make-up times.
Student academic performance on the TPOLs
Out of the 42 presentations, 16 received a mark of “exceeds,” 18 received a mark of “meets,” 5 received a mark of “meets with revisions to the digital portfolio,” and 3 needed to revise and present the presentation. Of those three students, 2 needed to present one of their claims, and 1 student needed to revise and present all three of his claims. The graph below depicts these results.
Correlations between student-to-student feedback and performance on the TPOL
In my phase 2 action and assessment plan, I initially wanted to measure the effects of student-to-student feedback by comparing students' scripts with their presentation content. However, I found that comparing a script to the presentation did not tell me which parts they revised due to feedback and which parts they revised on their own. Because of this issue, I decided to compare students who met with their peers and those who did not in terms of their performance on the TPOLs.
As stated in my phase 2 write up, students were encouraged to meet with their critical friends group in a quiet room to practice their presentations and to give feedback to their peers. Out of the 42 students, 25 met with their peers and 17 did not.
Out of the 25 students who met with their peers, 12 students received a mark of “exceeds,” 9 students received a mark of “meets,” 2 students received a mark of “meets with revisions to the DP,” and 1 student needed to present one of the three claims again.
Out of the 17 students who did not meet with their peers to practice, 4 students received a mark of “exceeds,” 9 students received a mark of “meets,” 2 students received a mark of “meets with revisions to the DP,” and 2 students needed to present again. Out of the two students who needed to present again, one student needed to revise and present one out of the three claims, and the second student needed to revise and present three of his claims.
The following graphs display the marks for students who met with their groups and for students who did not meet with their groups for feedback.
In my phase 2 action and assessment plan, I initially wanted to measure the effects of student-to-student feedback by comparing students' scripts with their presentation content. However, I found that comparing a script to the presentation did not tell me which parts they revised due to feedback and which parts they revised on their own. Because of this issue, I decided to compare students who met with their peers and those who did not in terms of their performance on the TPOLs.
As stated in my phase 2 write up, students were encouraged to meet with their critical friends group in a quiet room to practice their presentations and to give feedback to their peers. Out of the 42 students, 25 met with their peers and 17 did not.
Out of the 25 students who met with their peers, 12 students received a mark of “exceeds,” 9 students received a mark of “meets,” 2 students received a mark of “meets with revisions to the DP,” and 1 student needed to present one of the three claims again.
Out of the 17 students who did not meet with their peers to practice, 4 students received a mark of “exceeds,” 9 students received a mark of “meets,” 2 students received a mark of “meets with revisions to the DP,” and 2 students needed to present again. Out of the two students who needed to present again, one student needed to revise and present one out of the three claims, and the second student needed to revise and present three of his claims.
The following graphs display the marks for students who met with their groups and for students who did not meet with their groups for feedback.
Based on the data presented above, I found a difference in performance on the TPOL between students who met with their peers to practice and give feedback and students who did not meet with their peers to practice and give feedback, particularly for the “exceeds” category. For those who met with peers, twelve students received a mark of “exceeds” while only four students who did not meet with peers received a mark of “exceeds."
There are many possible explanations for this correlation. Students who met with their peers might have received feedback and used that feedback to revise and improve their presentation. Another possible explanation is the students who met with their peers may have seen successful strategies from their peers or heard valuable feedback from a peer's presentation that they then incorporated into their own presentations. Both of these explanations attribute the student-to-student feedback as the cause of improved performance on the TPOL. However, this might not be the case. This correlation might be the result of preparedness or prior academic achievement and skill. Students who met with their peers may have done so because they were prepared at that time, while students who did not meet might not have been prepared. The students who were prepared earlier would have had more opportunities to refine and practice. Another explanation is the more high achieving students tended to meet with peers than to not meet with their peers. Their high scores could be explained by their work ethic, their higher abilities in articulating their thoughts, or their more developed skills in reasoning and providing evidence.
There are many possible explanations for this correlation. Students who met with their peers might have received feedback and used that feedback to revise and improve their presentation. Another possible explanation is the students who met with their peers may have seen successful strategies from their peers or heard valuable feedback from a peer's presentation that they then incorporated into their own presentations. Both of these explanations attribute the student-to-student feedback as the cause of improved performance on the TPOL. However, this might not be the case. This correlation might be the result of preparedness or prior academic achievement and skill. Students who met with their peers may have done so because they were prepared at that time, while students who did not meet might not have been prepared. The students who were prepared earlier would have had more opportunities to refine and practice. Another explanation is the more high achieving students tended to meet with peers than to not meet with their peers. Their high scores could be explained by their work ethic, their higher abilities in articulating their thoughts, or their more developed skills in reasoning and providing evidence.
Students' opinions From feedback forms
Because many possible explanations exist for the correlations found between TPOL performance and students-to-student feedback, I wanted to obtain the students' opinions on the effects of student-to-student feedback. To find answers to my questions, I gave students a feedback form that included the following questions:
Unfortunately, I forgot to hand out these feedback forms the first two days, and so I only received fourteen students' feedback forms. However, the days students acted as audience members were randomized, and so the students who filled out the forms were a random sample of the class, albeit a small one.
Question #1:
For the first question, "What did you do to prepare for the TPOL," I wanted to discover what each student perceived as important steps in preparing for their presentation. Of the fourteen responses, nine students mentioned meeting with peers which suggests to me that students at least remembered the experience and considered it as a strategy in preparing for their TPOLs. The remaining five students mentioned other strategies such as filling out the packet given at the beginning of the TPOL prep time, writing out their scripts, watching other students' TPOLs and learning from them, gathering multiple pieces of evidence and making sure their presentation included all of the criteria needed for a passing mark.
Question #2:
For the second question, "How often did you get help from your critical friends group," I wanted to know whether students had sought feedback more than once. This was because I had only checked off students' names when I saw them in the quiet room rather than recorded how often I saw them working with others. I also wanted to get students' perceptions of how often they sought feedback from others. Out of the fourteen student responses, three students reported getting help "three or more times," nine students reported "once or twice," and two students reported "none."
- What did you do to prepare for the TPOL?
- How often did you get help from your critical friends group?
- How helpful was your critical friends group in preparing you for your TPOL?
- Why did you choose this response to #3?
- What could we have done to better prepare you for your TPOL? What suggestions do you have for next year?
Unfortunately, I forgot to hand out these feedback forms the first two days, and so I only received fourteen students' feedback forms. However, the days students acted as audience members were randomized, and so the students who filled out the forms were a random sample of the class, albeit a small one.
Question #1:
For the first question, "What did you do to prepare for the TPOL," I wanted to discover what each student perceived as important steps in preparing for their presentation. Of the fourteen responses, nine students mentioned meeting with peers which suggests to me that students at least remembered the experience and considered it as a strategy in preparing for their TPOLs. The remaining five students mentioned other strategies such as filling out the packet given at the beginning of the TPOL prep time, writing out their scripts, watching other students' TPOLs and learning from them, gathering multiple pieces of evidence and making sure their presentation included all of the criteria needed for a passing mark.
Question #2:
For the second question, "How often did you get help from your critical friends group," I wanted to know whether students had sought feedback more than once. This was because I had only checked off students' names when I saw them in the quiet room rather than recorded how often I saw them working with others. I also wanted to get students' perceptions of how often they sought feedback from others. Out of the fourteen student responses, three students reported getting help "three or more times," nine students reported "once or twice," and two students reported "none."
Question #3:
For the third question, "How helpful was your critical friends group in preparing you for your TPOL," I received a variety of responses. Out of the fourteen response, four circled "very helpful," five circled "somewhat helpful" three circled "not very helpful" and one student circled "not helpful." The graph below depicts these responses.
For the third question, "How helpful was your critical friends group in preparing you for your TPOL," I received a variety of responses. Out of the fourteen response, four circled "very helpful," five circled "somewhat helpful" three circled "not very helpful" and one student circled "not helpful." The graph below depicts these responses.
Question #4:
In order to get a better idea of what the responses in the third question meant, I looked at the responses for the fourth question, "Why did you choose this response to #3?" By examining their explanations, I began to understand why students thought their groups were helpful or not very helpful.
From the four students who selected "not helpful" or "not very helpful" in describing their experiences with their critical friends groups, I received the following insightful explanations:
The two students who wrote that they prefer to receive help from teachers both received an "exceeds" for their presentations, and did in fact seek feedback frequently from me. I encouraged both to work with others, but they both said that they preferred working alone to refine.
From the ten students who selected "somewhat helpful" or "very helpful," I received a variety of thoughtful responses. I selected the ones that articulated different values in meeting with their peers.
These responses suggest to me that feedback groups were successful for some students and unsuccessful for others. These responses also suggest that I could do a lot to improve the groups and the type of feedback the students receive. The groups that worked best seemed to be the ones where students met with their friends. This result was a little counter-intuitive for me. I usually group students with peers they don't usually work with so that they would get different perspectives than the ones they typically receive. I also group them this way to keep students on task, especially since we were instructing 42 students rather than the usual 22. However, with something as delicate as feedback, maybe I should consider grouping students with the peers they feel most comfortable with or even have students choose their own groups. The student's comment, "I didn't want to present unfinished work to people that I'm not close to" reminded me of the courage it takes to open yourself up to criticism.
With regards to the type of feedback students received, some students found that the feedback was helpful, and other students did not find it to be as helpful. My teaching partner and I tried to model the feedback we would like to see the students give each other, but we might possibly want to be more explicit next time. After the mock TPOL, we did not take the opportunity to have students discuss the type of feedback we gave, which might have helped those students who struggled in offering valuable feedback.
Question #5:
For the final question, "What could we have done to better prepare you for your TPOL," I wanted to understand students' preferred strategies in preparing for a presentation. Students might potentially think that the way my teaching partner and I structured the class was all wrong, and have some strategies to offer us. For this question, four students requested more work time in class, three students would have preferred the class to be less structured and three students wanted a clearer understanding of what was expected of them. The other four students stated that the preparation we provided this year was sufficient. One student did reference their critical friends group, which I included below:
"Have these TPOL prep classes [next year]...Have a better critical group prep and tell what you want [students] to get out of it."
When I first assigned students to their critical friends group, I made sure to explain the purpose of the groups: to inform students of what they are doing well and what they could improve. Modeling the mock TPOL was meant to prepare students to give each other feedback. We repeated the importance of giving appreciations, offering suggestions, and making sure that the students are meeting all the criteria to pass. However, there are a number of reasons why this student and her group may not have heard these ideas. Managing 42 students and having students moving to different rooms to practice might have been contributing factors, which I will try to take into consideration in conveying important messages and when facilitating group work .
In order to get a better idea of what the responses in the third question meant, I looked at the responses for the fourth question, "Why did you choose this response to #3?" By examining their explanations, I began to understand why students thought their groups were helpful or not very helpful.
From the four students who selected "not helpful" or "not very helpful" in describing their experiences with their critical friends groups, I received the following insightful explanations:
- "Because it was easier to practice with my friends and I didn't want to present unfinished work to people that I'm not close to."
- "I had rather ask my teacher instead of critical friends because I felt that I received more help from teachers."
- "I met with them twice and I didn't get much feedback from them."
- "Usually when I prepare for TPOLs I work alone and have a teacher review when needed."
The two students who wrote that they prefer to receive help from teachers both received an "exceeds" for their presentations, and did in fact seek feedback frequently from me. I encouraged both to work with others, but they both said that they preferred working alone to refine.
From the ten students who selected "somewhat helpful" or "very helpful," I received a variety of thoughtful responses. I selected the ones that articulated different values in meeting with their peers.
- "I chose this because I was lost and didn't know at all what to do, but they helped"
- "Because I believe that mostly I passed my TPOL because of the great feedback I got."
- "Because I feel that I was lucky enough to get thoughtful people [in my critical friends group] that I am comfortable with."
These responses suggest to me that feedback groups were successful for some students and unsuccessful for others. These responses also suggest that I could do a lot to improve the groups and the type of feedback the students receive. The groups that worked best seemed to be the ones where students met with their friends. This result was a little counter-intuitive for me. I usually group students with peers they don't usually work with so that they would get different perspectives than the ones they typically receive. I also group them this way to keep students on task, especially since we were instructing 42 students rather than the usual 22. However, with something as delicate as feedback, maybe I should consider grouping students with the peers they feel most comfortable with or even have students choose their own groups. The student's comment, "I didn't want to present unfinished work to people that I'm not close to" reminded me of the courage it takes to open yourself up to criticism.
With regards to the type of feedback students received, some students found that the feedback was helpful, and other students did not find it to be as helpful. My teaching partner and I tried to model the feedback we would like to see the students give each other, but we might possibly want to be more explicit next time. After the mock TPOL, we did not take the opportunity to have students discuss the type of feedback we gave, which might have helped those students who struggled in offering valuable feedback.
Question #5:
For the final question, "What could we have done to better prepare you for your TPOL," I wanted to understand students' preferred strategies in preparing for a presentation. Students might potentially think that the way my teaching partner and I structured the class was all wrong, and have some strategies to offer us. For this question, four students requested more work time in class, three students would have preferred the class to be less structured and three students wanted a clearer understanding of what was expected of them. The other four students stated that the preparation we provided this year was sufficient. One student did reference their critical friends group, which I included below:
"Have these TPOL prep classes [next year]...Have a better critical group prep and tell what you want [students] to get out of it."
When I first assigned students to their critical friends group, I made sure to explain the purpose of the groups: to inform students of what they are doing well and what they could improve. Modeling the mock TPOL was meant to prepare students to give each other feedback. We repeated the importance of giving appreciations, offering suggestions, and making sure that the students are meeting all the criteria to pass. However, there are a number of reasons why this student and her group may not have heard these ideas. Managing 42 students and having students moving to different rooms to practice might have been contributing factors, which I will try to take into consideration in conveying important messages and when facilitating group work .
Observations from my teaching journal
A final measurement of the influence of student-to-student feedback on academic achievement was my observation journal. In my observation journal, I wanted to record whether I saw an improvement in students who met with their peers for feedback. I also wanted to pay close attention to the focus group from my phase 1 to see whether they sought feedback, and whether their confidence in voicing their opinions in their presentations changed in any way.
Students who seemed to benefit from their feedback groups:
From my observations, I saw specific students who seemed to benefit from meeting with their critical friends group. Below is an excerpt from my journal. I wrote this reflection after I saw a certain student present his TPOL:
"I think L's presentation* has been my favorite so far. His presentation changed a lot from the first time I spoke with him. I especially loved how he compared the process of teaching tennis to learning calculus. He was one of the students who had practiced a lot with his group. I remember talking with him after he met with his group, and although he still was very nervous for his presentation, he seemed less so after he met with them. Two very strong, very positive students were in his group."
*I used the letter "L" to represent the student's name in an effort to protect this student's identity.
I included this excerpt because this student was really nervous for the TPOL. He told me multiple times that he was afraid of failing. One of the goals for setting up student-to-student feedback groups was to give students a support group. In L's case, the group actually seemed to support one another and give confidence. I saw other students who seemed to benefit in similar ways. In the Conclusion and Final Reflection, I discuss the strategies these students employed when giving feedback that may have contributed to their groups' success.
Observations of my focus group from phase 1
Out of the three students, only one of the students met with her group to receive feedback. One of the other two students frequently asked me to give her feedback, either by examining her script or giving suggestions for her digital portfolio. The third student did not seem to seek out feedback in class from either a teacher or student. All three students performed well on their TPOLs. The first two students I mentioned received an "Exceeds" and the third student received a "Meets with revisions to the DP." The third student's was weaker than the first two, and he seemed more nervous. The first two clearly articulated their ideas and provided ample evidence to support their claims. I was surprised at how calm and confident these two students were in sharing their ideas. They seemed very proud to share what they had learned these past four years.
Based on the performance of the three students in my focus group, there seemed to be a correlation between receiving feedback and academic performance, even if the feedback did not come from a student for one of the focus group students. In my Conclusion and Final Reflection, I discuss the difference between students seeking feedback from the teacher and seeking feedback from their peers.
Students who seemed to benefit from their feedback groups:
From my observations, I saw specific students who seemed to benefit from meeting with their critical friends group. Below is an excerpt from my journal. I wrote this reflection after I saw a certain student present his TPOL:
"I think L's presentation* has been my favorite so far. His presentation changed a lot from the first time I spoke with him. I especially loved how he compared the process of teaching tennis to learning calculus. He was one of the students who had practiced a lot with his group. I remember talking with him after he met with his group, and although he still was very nervous for his presentation, he seemed less so after he met with them. Two very strong, very positive students were in his group."
*I used the letter "L" to represent the student's name in an effort to protect this student's identity.
I included this excerpt because this student was really nervous for the TPOL. He told me multiple times that he was afraid of failing. One of the goals for setting up student-to-student feedback groups was to give students a support group. In L's case, the group actually seemed to support one another and give confidence. I saw other students who seemed to benefit in similar ways. In the Conclusion and Final Reflection, I discuss the strategies these students employed when giving feedback that may have contributed to their groups' success.
Observations of my focus group from phase 1
Out of the three students, only one of the students met with her group to receive feedback. One of the other two students frequently asked me to give her feedback, either by examining her script or giving suggestions for her digital portfolio. The third student did not seem to seek out feedback in class from either a teacher or student. All three students performed well on their TPOLs. The first two students I mentioned received an "Exceeds" and the third student received a "Meets with revisions to the DP." The third student's was weaker than the first two, and he seemed more nervous. The first two clearly articulated their ideas and provided ample evidence to support their claims. I was surprised at how calm and confident these two students were in sharing their ideas. They seemed very proud to share what they had learned these past four years.
Based on the performance of the three students in my focus group, there seemed to be a correlation between receiving feedback and academic performance, even if the feedback did not come from a student for one of the focus group students. In my Conclusion and Final Reflection, I discuss the difference between students seeking feedback from the teacher and seeking feedback from their peers.