Optimal feedback structure and interactional pattern in formative peer practices: Students' beliefs

This multi-methods study explored the perceptual reactions of 338 college students to peer feedback prior to and after instruction, addressing its structural and interactional aspects alike. The data were collected through questionnaire, verbal protocol, demographic checklist, and group interview. Based on the quantitative results, a relatively conservative (e.g., desire for some of the errors to be corrected), dependent (e.g., tendency towards cooperative follow-up assignments), and restrictive (e.g., perceived superiority of language errors) view at early stages was gradually superseded with a more confident (e.g., call for receiving hints), democratic (e.g., demanding feedback on content errors), and autonomous (e.g., preference for solo post-feedback activities) inclination. Protocol results reported the students' deeper understanding of peer activities and higher perceived self-regulation in the post-treatment condition. The group interview indicated, above all, that students preferred assessment by multiple and different (rather than the same) partners and that peer feedback gradually encouraged competition rather than jealousy and retaliation since their tension and shyness considerably lessened.