Digital Peer Feedback and Students’ Critical Thinking: What Correlation and to What Extent?

Authors

  • Berliana Dyah Ayu Aprilianti Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia
  • Agus Widyantoro Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v12i2.10264

Keywords:

Digital learning, Digital feedback, Peer feedback, Critical thinking

Abstract

Digital peer feedback is one of the valuable instructional activities that can enhance students' critical thinking abilities. Yet, knowing it is an urge, the discussion about this has not been much quantitatively checked by some scholars.Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between the qualification of perceived of providing digital peer feedback and students' critical thinking. In amplifying the purpose, this current research utilized a quantitative approach with a correlational design. The result shows an overall rating of 3.55 out of 4, indicates that students show a high perception of providing digital peer feedback. The critical thinking score of the students was indicates in the second result (3.82 out of 5), which shows that it is high level of critical thinking. The last finding examines the relationship between students' critical thinking and their perception of the advantages of providing digital peer feedback. The correlation test's significant (2-tailed) value is found to be 0.000 < 0.05 in the result, indicating that the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted. The relationship was classified as weak level since the Pearson correlation result (r-value) was 0.358. It concludes that students applied critical thinking skills when providing digital peer feedback, and they also believed that providing digital peer feedback had various benefits for them. The result, it can be used to gain a greater understanding on how students  view digital peer feedback, their critical thinking, and the relationship between qualification of perceived of providing digital peer feedback and students' critical thinking.

Author Biographies

Berliana Dyah Ayu Aprilianti, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta

English Language Education, Faculty of Language, Arts, and Culture, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Agus Widyantoro, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta

English Language Education, Faculty of Language, Arts, and Culture, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

References

Aisyah, A., & Wicaksono, B. H. (2020). The level of teacher's feedback in english teaching: an efl classroom discourse analysis. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 7(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v7i1.12237

Almahasees, Z., Mohsen, K., & Amin, M. O. (2021, May). Faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning during COVID-19. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 6). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.638470

Alsaleh, N. J. (2020). Teaching critical thinking skills: Literature review. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 19(1), 21-39.

Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Vanderbit University Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/.

Au, H. Y. C., & Bardakçi, M. (2020). An analysis of the effect of peer and teacher feedback on EFL learners' oral performances and speaking self-efficacy levels. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 7(4), 1453-1468.

Berndt, A. E. (2020). Sampling methods. Journal of Human Lactation, 36(2), 224-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334420906850

Bloom, B. S. (2010). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Campbell, C., Borer, L., & McCarthy, S. (2020). Enhancing feedback with FeedbackFruits: Scaling for transformative implementation. ASCILITE Publications, 322-327.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Coulson-Thomas, C. (2022). Critical thinking for responsible leadership. Management Services Journal, 66(4), 32-36.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planing, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 4th Edition. Boston: Pearson. Ch. 11, Correlational Designs, p. 337 – 360.

Cresswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Fifth edition. Los Angles: SAGE.

Dippold, D. (2009). Peer feedback through blogs: Student and teacher perceptions in an advanced German class. ReCALL, 21(1), 18-36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834400900010X

Dung, D. T. H. (2020). The advantages and disadvantages of virtual learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 10(3), 45-48.

Ekahitanond, V. (2013). Promoting university students’ critical thinking skills through peer feedback activity in an online discussion forum. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 59(2), 247-265. https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/ajer.v59i2.55617

Esmaeeli, M., & Sadeghi, K. (2020). The effect of direct versus indirect focused written corrective feedback on developing EFL learners’ written and oral skills. Language Related Research. 11(5), 124-89.‎ https://doi.org/10.29252/LRR.11.5.124

Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer eedback. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 443-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2007.03.002

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

Hoomanfard, M. H. (2017). EFL learners'attitudes and perceptions of online and conventional peer written feedback: A tertiary level experience. Malaysian Journal of Languages and Linguistics (MJLL), 6(1), 49-62. https://doi.org/10.24200/mjll.vol6iss1pp49-62

Huisman, B., Saab, N., van den Broek, P., & van Driel, J. (2019). A questionnaire to assess students’ belief about peer-feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(6), 863-880. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1545896

Ion, G., Martí, A. S., & Morell, I. A. (2018). Giving or receiving feedback: Which is more beneficial to students’ learning?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 115. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1484881

Ismail, I. A., Pernadi, N. L., & Febriyanti, A. (2022). How to grab and determine the size of the sample for research. International Journal of Academic and Applied Research (IJAAR), 6(9), 88-92.

Kumar, T., Soozandehfar, S. M. A., Hashemifardnia, A., & Mombeini, R. (2023). Self vs. peer assessment activities in EFL-speaking classes: Impacts on students’ self-regulated learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Language Testing in Asia, 13(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00251-3

Kusumaningrum, S. R., Cahyono, B. Y., & Prayogo, J. A. (2019). The effect of different types of peer feedback provision on EFL students' writing performance. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 213-224. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12114a

Kuyyogsuy, S. (2019). Promoting peer feedback in developing students' english writing ability in L2 writing class. International Education Studies, 12(9), 76-90. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n9p76

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson's Research Reports, 6, 40 41.

Lambert, V. A., & Lambert, C. E. (2012). Qualitative descriptive research: An acceptable design. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research, 16(4), 255-256.

Lv, X., Ren, W., & Xie, Y. (2021). The effects of online feedback on ESL/EFL writing: A meta-analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(6), 643-653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00594-6

Miller, M. T., & Olthouse, J. (2013). Critical thinking in gifted childrens' offline and Digital peer feedback. Contemporary Educational Technology, 4(1), 66-80. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6092

Muflihah, T., & Authar, N. (2021). The implementation of peer feedback in EFL writing class. Konstruktivisme: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 13(2), 184-190. https://doi.org/10.35457/konstruk.v13i2.1844

Murphy, E. (2004). An instrument to support thinking critically about critical thinking in online asynchronous discussions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1349

Orszag, A. (2015). Exploring finnish university students’ perceived level of critical thinking. Jyväskylä, Finland: MPED, Faculty of Education, University of Jyväskylä.

Panadero, E., & Alqassab, M. (2019). An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assessment, peer feedback, peer review, peer evaluation and peer grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–26. doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1600186

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Rowman & Littlefield.

Pham, T. N., Lin, M., Trinh, V. Q., & Bui, L. T. P. (2020). Electronic peer feedback, EFL academic writing and reflective thinking: Evidence from a Confucian context. Sage Open, 10(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020914554

Ravand, H., & Rasekh, A. E. (2011). Feedback in ESL writing: toward an interactional approach. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 2(5). https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.5.1136-1145

Rusdi, S. H., & Umar, I. N. (2015). Students’ levels of critical thinking, supportive behaviors and types of questions in an online forum learning environment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1752-1758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.232

Sari, A. B. P. (2019). EFL peer feedback through the chatroom in Padlet. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 22(1), 46-57. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v22i1.1701

Shang, H. F. (2019). Exploring online peer feedback and automated corrective feedback on EFL writing performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(1), 4-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1629601

Storch, N. (2019). Collaborative writing as peer feedback. Feedback in Second Language Writing. Context and Issues (2a), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.010

Supriyatno, T., Susilawati, S., & Hassan, A. (2020). E-learning development in improving students' critical thinking ability. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 15(5), 1099-1106. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v15i5.5154

Uymaz, E. (2019). The effects of peer feedback on the essay writing performances of EFL students. International journal of curriculum and instruction, 11(2), 20-37.

Van-Geel, M., & Luttikhuis, M. (2020). Digital peer feedback to improve students' learning. In Engaging, Engineering, Education: Book of Abstracts, SEFI 48th Annual Conference University of Twente (online) (pp. 1276-1279).

Wenny, S., & Fajar, R. (2019). The effect of peer assessment towards students’speaking skill at semester II of STIE Muhammadiyah Jambi 2018-2019. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 6(2), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v6i2.9886

Wihastyanang, W. D., Kusumaningrum, S. R., Latief, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2020). Impacts of providing online teacher and peer feedback on students’ writing performance. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(2), 178-189. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.728157

Wirantaka, A. (2019). Investigating written feedback on students’ academic writing. In Third International Conference on Sustainable Innovation 2019–Humanity, Education and Social Sciences (IcoSIHESS 2019). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icosihess-19.2019.1

Wood, J. (2022). Making peer feedback work: The contribution of technology-mediated dialogic peer feedback to feedback uptake and literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(3), 327-346. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1914544

Wu, W. C. V., Petit, E., & Chen, C. H. (2015). EFL writing revision with blind expert and peer review using a CMC open forum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 58-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.937442

Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Learning, 15(3), 179-200. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006. 09.004

Yang, Y. T. C., Chuang, Y. C., Li, L. Y., & Tseng, S. S. (2013). A blended learning environment for individualized English listening and speaking integrating critical thinking. Computers & Education, 63, 285-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.012

Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing writing, 15(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.01.002

Downloads

Published

2024-04-22

How to Cite

Aprilianti, B. D. A., & Widyantoro, A. (2024). Digital Peer Feedback and Students’ Critical Thinking: What Correlation and to What Extent?. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 12(2), 629–644. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v12i2.10264

Issue

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2024)

Section

Articles

Citation Check

License

License and Publishing Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  1. They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  2. The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  3. That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  4. That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  5. They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  6. They agree to the following license and publishing agreement.

Copyright
Authors who publish with JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Licensing for Data Publication

JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching uses a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:
Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.