Abstracts
Résumé
Dans le contexte d’une évaluation continue pour apprendre, expérimentée dans un cours universitaire en Suisse romande, l’article étudie la perception des étudiants quand ils reçoivent une pluralité de feedbacks des pairs à propos d’un travail réalisé en petits groupes collaboratifs. Comment les étudiants, qui sont à la fois évalués et évaluateurs, perçoivent-ils ces feedbacks multiples, notamment quand ils sont amenés à les comparer dans la perspective de réguler leur propre travail universitaire et leurs compétences évaluatives ? L’article analyse finement les processus et les ressentis en jeu quand les étudiants constatent des similarités et des différences entre les feedbacks reçus et produits. Au regard des résultats obtenus, une réflexion conceptuelle est proposée autour des notions de feedback, de feedback interne, de feedback global et de métafeedback, qui contribuent aux processus de régulation et d’apprentissage générés.
Mots-clés :
- évaluation pour apprendre,
- évaluation continue,
- feedbacks écrits entre pairs,
- perception,
- régulation des apprentissages,
- enseignement supérieur
Abstract
In the context of continuous assessment for learning in a university course in French-speaking Switzerland, this article studies students’ perception when they receive multiple feedbacks from their peers about a written academic assignment carried out in small collaborative groups. How do students, who are both assessees and assessors, perceive these multiple feedbacks, especially when they are led to compare them to regulate their own initial assignment and their assessment skills? This article analyses in detail the processes and feelings at play when students notice similarities and differences between the feedbacks they received and produced. In light of the results, conceptual considerations are proposed around the notions of feedback, internal feedback, comprehensive feedback and metafeedback, seen as contributing to the regulation and learning processes involved.
Keywords:
- assessment for learning,
- continuous assessment,
- written peer feedback,
- perception,
- regulation of learning,
- higher education
Resumo
No contexto de uma avaliação contínua para a aprendizagem, experimentada num curso universitário na Suíça francófona, o artigo estuda a perceção dos estudantes quando recebem uma pluralidade de feedbacks de colegas sobre o trabalho realizado em pequenos grupos colaborativos. Como é que os estudantes, que são ao mesmo tempo avaliados e avaliadores, percebem os feedbacks múltiplos, principalmente quando são levados a compará-los no âmbito da regulação do seu próprio trabalho académico e das suas competências avaliativas? O artigo analisa detalhadamente os processos e sentimentos em jogo quando os estudantes constatam as semelhanças e as diferenças entre os feedbacks recebidos e produzidos. Perante os resultados obtidos, propõe-se uma reflexão conceitual em torno das noções de feedback, feedback interno, feedback global e metafeedback, que contribuem para os processos de regulação e aprendizagem desencadeados.
Palavras chaves:
- avaliação para a aprendizagem,
- avaliação contínua,
- feedback escrito entre pares,
- perceção,
- regulação das aprendizagens,
- ensino superior
Appendices
Références
- Allal, L. & Laveault, D. (2009). Assessment for learning: évaluation-soutien d’apprentissage. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 32(2), 99-106. https://doi.org/10.7202/1024956ar
- Allal, L. & Mottier Lopez, L. (2005). L’évaluation formative de l’apprentissage : revue de publications en langue française. Dans OCDE, L’évaluation formative : pour un meilleur apprentissage dans les classes secondaires (pp. 265-290). Éditions OCDE/CERI.
- Bain, J. (2010). Integrating student voice : Assessment for empowerment. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 4(1), 14-29. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1130598.pdf
- Bardin, L. (1998). L’analyse de contenu. PUF.
- Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148. http://electronicportfolios.org/afl/InsideBlackBox.pdf
- Bloom, B. S., Hasting, J. T., & Madaus, G. F. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. McGraw-Hill.
- Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728
- Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). What is the problem with feedback? In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well (pp. 1-10). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203074336
- Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2015). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133
- Butera, F., Buchs, C. & Darnon, C. (dir.). (2011). L’évaluation, une menace ? PUF. https://doi.org/10.3917/puf.darno.2011.01
- Cao, Z., Yu, S., & Huang, J. (2019). A qualitative inquiry into undergraduates’ learning from giving and receiving peer feedback in L2 writing: Insights from a case study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 63, 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.08.001
- Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
- Carless, D., & Winstone, N. (2020). Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372
- Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
- Earl, L. M. (2003). Assessment as Learning. Using assessment to maximize student learning. Hawker Brownlow Education.
- Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395-430. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059004395
- Girardet, C. (2020). Lorsque les étudiant·es produisent et reçoivent des feedbacks entre pairs à l’université : étude des perceptions d’un dispositif d’évaluation continue facilité par le numérique. La Revue LEeE, 2, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.48325/rleee.002.04
- Girardet, C. (2021). Lorsque les étudiant·es produisent et reçoivent des feedbacks entre pairs à l’université : les émotions pour apprendre. La Revue LEeE, 5, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.48325/rleee.005.01
- Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
- McConlogue, T. (2015). Making judgements : Investigating the process of composing and receiving peer feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 40(9), 1495-1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.868878
- Molloy, E., Borrell-Carrió, F., & Epstein, R. (2013). The impact of emotions in feedback. In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well (pp. 50-71). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203074336
- Mottier Lopez, L. (2016). La microculture de classe : un cadre d’analyse et d’interprétation de la régulation située des apprentissages des élèves. Dans B. Noël & S. C. Cartier (dir.), De la métacognition à l’apprentissage autorégulé (pp. 67-78). De Boeck.
- Mottier Lopez, L. (2020, 11 novembre). Les feedbacks en évaluation pour apprendre [support de cours non publié].
- Mottier Lopez, L. (2021). Une évaluation continue pour apprendre durablement, une évaluation à visée inclusive. Revue suisse de pédagogie spécialisée, 4, 9-16.
- Mottier Lopez, L., & Girardet, C. (2022). L’évaluation pour mieux soutenir les apprentissages : un exemple dans l’enseignement supérieur. In B. Albero & J. Thievenaz (Eds.), Enquêter dans les métiers de l’humain : traité de méthodologie de la recherche en sciences de l’éducation et de la formation (Tome III, pp. 283‑297). Editions Raison et Passions.
- Nicol, D. (2013). Resituating feedback from the reactive to the proactive. In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education [Kindle DX version]. Routledge.
- Nicol, D. (2020). The power of internal feedback : Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(1), 756-778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education : A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518
- Panadero, E., Jonsson, A., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2016). Scaffolding self-regulated learning through self-assessment and peer assessment : Guidelines for classroom implementation. In D. Laveault & L. Allal (Eds.), Assessment for learning : Meeting the challenge of implementation (pp. 311-326). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39211-0_18
- Rowe, A. D., Fitness, J., & Wood, L. N. (2014). The role and functionality of emotions in feedback at university : A qualitative study. The Australian Educational Researcher, 41, 283-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0135-7
- Schillings, M., Roebertsen, H., Savelberg, H., van Dijk, A., & Dolmans, D. (2021) Improving the understanding of written peer feedback through face-to-face peer dialogue : Students’ perspective. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(5), 1100-1116. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1798889
- Strijbos, J. W., Ochoa, T. A., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Segers, M. S. R., & Tillema, H. H. (2009). Fostering interactivity through formative peer assessment in (web-based) collaborative learning environments. In C. Mourlas, N. Tsianos & P. Germanakos (Eds.), Cognitive and emotional processes in web-based education: Integrating human factors and personalization (pp. 375-395). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-392-0.ch018
- Yang, M., & Carless, D. (2013). The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 285-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.719154
10.7202/1024956ar