Abstract:

The value of online peer feedback has been widely established by researchers and practitioners. However, despite the wide use of this collaborative activity, questions about its impact on students' performance are still widely raised. The study seeks to address this gap by focusing on the relationship between different elements of peer-editing and subsequent student performance. The analysis was conducted from two perspectives: feedback givers and feedback receivers. The paper used data about the number of comments and tracked changes (words deleted and added) together with survey responses from a group of bachelor students engaged in peer editing of one another's essays in an online security studies course at university. Students’ performance was measured with the help of writing scores on essays. The results showed that students who receive more comments write better essays. However, no relationship was found between the student's performance and the number of tracked changes (neither words deleted, nor words added). The most striking result to emerge from the data is that students who assume that peers provide high quality tracked changes get lower writing scores on essays. The findings of the study contribute to our understanding of peer feedback elements and their influence on students’ performance and provide the basis for further investigation of the interplay between students’ collaborative activities, their performance, and their attitudes.

Keywords:

Comments, peer editing, peer feedback, perception, tracked changes, writing performance.