This article explores the efficacy of formative assessment feedback models in higher education. Over 1 year and two courses, three feedback techniques were trialled: staff-to-student feedback in class, peer-to-peer feedback in class and peer-to-peer feedback online, via the Café, an e-learning application hosted by Facebook. Every 2 weeks, students were required to bring work-in-progress to tutorial classes and discuss their work with their peers and tutors. In alternating weeks, students posted work-in-progress to a forum in the Café, and critiqued their peers’ submissions. The three feedback measures were evaluated by the participating students at the end of each semester, in the form of an online survey, which provided the opportunity to critically reflect on the experience. The results of the student experience are discussed in light of the growing use of online spaces for collaborative learning and peer feedback.
BiggsJB (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does. Maidenhead: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
2.
BlackPWiliamD (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice5(1): 7–74.
3.
ChengWWarrenM (1999) Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education24(3): 301–14.
4.
CrookAMauchlineAMawS. (2012) The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students?Computers & Education58(1): 386–96.
5.
DaviesP (2000) Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International37(4): 346–54.
6.
DuffyP (2011) Facebook or Faceblock: Cautionary tales exploring the rise of social networking within tertiary education. In: McLoughlinCLeeM (eds) Web 2.0 based e-learning: Applying Social Informatics for Tertiary Teaching. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 284–300.
7.
EvansC (2013) Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research83(1): 70–120.
8.
FerdigRE (2007) Editorial: Examining social software in teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education15(1): 5–10.
9.
FischerG (2001) Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In: Proceedings of the 24th information systems research seminar, Bergen, 11–14 August 2001.
10.
GarrisonRVaughanH (2008) Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles and Guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
11.
GedikNKirazEOzdenMY (2013) Design of a blended learning environment: Considerations and implementation issues. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology29(1): 1–19.
12.
GibbsGSimpsonC (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education1(1): 3–31.
13.
GouldJDayP (2013) Hearing you loud and clear: Student perspectives of audio feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education38(5): 554–66.
14.
GrahamC (2006) Blended learning systems: Definitions, current trends and future directions. In: BonkCGrahamC (eds) The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 3–21.
15.
HanrahanSJIsaacsG (2001) Assessing self- and peer-assessment: The students’ views. Higher Education Research and Development20(1): 53–70.
16.
HuytaA (2010) Diagnostic and formative assessment. In: SpolskyBHultF (eds) The Handbook of Educational Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 469–82.
17.
IronsA (2008) Enhancing Learning through Formative Assessment and Feedback: Key Guides for Effective Teaching in Higher Education. Abingdon: Routledge.
18.
IrwinCBallLDesbrowB. (2012) Students’ perceptions of using Facebook as an interactive learning resource at university. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology27(8): 1221–32.
19.
KurtzG (2013) Facebook group as a space for interactive and collaborative learning. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments1(4): 406–18.
20.
LiLLiuXSteckelbergA (2010) Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology41(3): 525–36.
21.
LiLSteckelbergALSrinivasanS (2008) Utilizing peer interactions to promote learning through a computer-assisted peer assessment system. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology34(2). Available at: http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/497/228
22.
LuntTCurranJ (2010) ‘Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education35(7): 759–69.
23.
McCarthyJ (2010) Blended learning environments: Using social networking sites to enhance the first year experience. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology26(6): 729–40.
24.
McCarthyJ (2012) International design collaboration and mentoring for tertiary students through Facebook. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology28(5): 755–75.
25.
McCarthyJ (2013a) Learning in Facebook: First year tertiary student reflections from 2008 to 2011. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology29(3): 337–56.
26.
McCarthyJ (2013b) The Café: Creating the ‘collaborative application for education’; a dedicated e-learning environment in Facebook. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments1(4): 419–38.
27.
MacLellanE (2001) Assessment for learning: The differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education26(4): 307–18.
28.
MazmanSGUsluelYK (2010) Modeling educational usage of Facebook. Computers and Education55(2): 444–53.
29.
MerrySOrsmondP (2008) Students’ attitudes to and usage of academic feedback provided via audio files. Bioscience Education11: 1–11.
30.
NicolDMacFarlane-DickD (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education31(2): 199–218.
31.
NicolDThomsonABreslinC (2014) Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education39(1): 102–22.
32.
OrsmondPMerryS (1996) The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education21(3): 239–50.
33.
PektasSGurelM (2014) Blended learning in design education: An analysis of students’ experiences within the disciplinary differences framework. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology30(1): 31–44.
34.
PopeN (2001) An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education26(3): 235–46.
35.
RambeP (2012) Critical discourse analysis of collaborative engagement in Facebook postings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology28(2): 295–314.
36.
ShepardL (2005) Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. In: Proceedings of the ETS invitational conference, the future of assessment: shaping teaching and learning, New York, 10–11 October 2005.
37.
ShihRC (2011) Can Web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology27(5): 829–45.
38.
ToppingK (1998) Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research68(3): 249–76.
39.
ToppingKJSmithEFSwansonI. (2000) Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education25(2): 149–169.
40.
ValenzuelaSParkNKeeKF (2008) Lessons from Facebook: The effect of social network sites on college students’ social capital. Submitted to the 9th International Symposium on Online Journalism, Austin, TX, 4–5 April 2008.
41.
Van GennipNAESegersMSRTillemaHH (2010) Peer assessment as a collaborative learning activity: The role of interpersonal variables and conceptions. Learning and Instruction20(4): 280–90.
42.
VenablesASummitR (2003) Enhancing scientific essay writing using peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International40(3): 281–90.
43.
WalkerM (2009) An investigation into written comments on assignments: Do students find them usable?Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education34(1): 67–78.
44.
WangQYWooHLQuekCL. (2012) Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology43(3): 428–38.
45.
WengerE (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
