IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p6435-d569478.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Reducing Discomfort Impacts Peer Assessments of Preservice Teachers

Author

Listed:
  • Woong Lim

    (Graduate School of Education, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea)

  • Ji-Won Son

    (Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA)

  • Seung-Hae Kang

    (Graduate School of Education, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea)

Abstract

This study examined the effects of a feedback model called Peer Review of Teaching (PRT) on preservice teachers’ learning. In this model, preservice teachers ( n = 81) participated in critical feedback on teaching demonstrations in the absence of presenters. Presented are four themes of the experience of teaching and sharing feedback including how the absence of a peer presenter impacted feedback process. Our findings suggest that teacher educators create intellectually safe and sensitive learning opportunities with critical feedback for preservice teachers to engage in a professional practice of peer assessments.

Suggested Citation

  • Woong Lim & Ji-Won Son & Seung-Hae Kang, 2021. "How Reducing Discomfort Impacts Peer Assessments of Preservice Teachers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6435-:d:569478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6435/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6435/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terry Connolly & Leonard M. Jessup & Joseph S. Valacich, 1990. "Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 689-703, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William G. Heninger & Alan R. Dennis & Kelly McNamara Hilmer, 2006. "Research Note: Individual Cognition and Dual-Task Interference in Group Support Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 415-424, December.
    2. Terri L. Griffith & Mark A. Fuller & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1998. "Facilitator Influence in Group Support Systems: Intended and Unintended Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 20-36, March.
    3. Mi, Hwang, 1998. "Did Task Type Matter in the Use of Decision Room GSS? A Critical Review and a Meta-analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Bruce A. Reinig & Robert O. Briggs, 2008. "On The Relationship Between Idea-Quantity and Idea-Quality During Ideation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 403-420, September.
    5. Isabella Seeber & Ronald Maier & Barbara Weber, 2013. "Macrocognition in Collaboration: Analyzing Processes of Team Knowledge Building with CoPrA," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 915-942, September.
    6. Jacqueline Ng Lane & Bruce Ankenman & Seyed Iravani, 2018. "Insight into Gender Differences in Higher Education: Evidence from Peer Reviews in an Introductory STEM Course," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 442-456, December.
    7. Alge, Bradley J. & Wiethoff, Carolyn & Klein, Howard J., 2003. "When does the medium matter? Knowledge-building experiences and opportunities in decision-making teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 26-37, May.
    8. Antonio Ferreira & Pedro Antunes & Valeria Herskovic, 2011. "Improving Group Attention: An Experiment with Synchronous Brainstorming," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 643-666, September.
    9. Bernard C. Y. Tan & Kwok-Kee Wei & Richard T. Watson & Danial L. Clapper & Ephraim R. McLean, 1998. "Computer-Mediated Communication and Majority Influence: Assessing the Impact in an Individualistic and a Collectivistic Culture," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1263-1278, September.
    10. Jan A. Kempkes & Francesco Suprano & Andreas Wömpener, 2024. "How management support systems affect job performance: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2013-2086, December.
    11. Daily, Bonnie F. & Teich, Jeffrey E., 2001. "Perceptions of contribution in multi-cultural groups in non-GDSS and GDSS environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 70-83, October.
    12. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann, 2001. "Group Decision and Negotiation in Strategy Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 119-140, March.
    13. Eric Overby, 2008. "Process Virtualization Theory and the Impact of Information Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 277-291, April.
    14. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden, 2005. "Using Causal Mapping with Group Support Systems to Elicit an Understanding of Failure in Complex Projects: Some Implications for Organizational Research," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 355-376, September.
    15. O'Leary, Kevin & Gleasure, Rob & O'Reilly, Philip & Feller, Joseph, 2022. "Introducing the concept of creative ancestry as a means of increasing perceived fairness and satisfaction in online collaboration: An experimental study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    16. J. H. Jung & Christoph Schneider & Joseph Valacich, 2010. "Enhancing the Motivational Affordance of Information Systems: The Effects of Real-Time Performance Feedback and Goal Setting in Group Collaboration Environments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 724-742, April.
    17. Wilson, Jeanne M. & Straus, Susan G. & McEvily, Bill, 2006. "All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 16-33, January.
    18. David S. Kerr & Uday S. Murthy, 2004. "Divergent and Convergent Idea Generation in Teams: A Comparison of Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Communication," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 381-399, July.
    19. Sajda Qureshi & Doug Vogel, 2001. "Adaptiveness in Virtual Teams: Organisational Challenges and Research Directions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 27-46, January.
    20. Laku Chidambaram & Robert Bostrom, 1997. "Group Development (II): Implications for GSS Research and Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 231-254, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6435-:d:569478. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.