IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v15y2022i11p503-d959404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Students’ Perception of the Use of a Rubric and Peer Reviews in an Online Learning Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Letebele Mphahlele

    (Department of Accountancy, College of Business and Economics, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2092, South Africa)

Abstract

Moving towards online learning during the coronavirus pandemic presented challenges, such as identifying assessments for learning. Assessments for learning involve using assessments as part of the learning process. Alternative assessments, as opposed to traditional assessments, are favoured for promoting for learning. These assessments include peer assessments and using criteria-referenced tools such as a rubric. Online learning environments often favour automated grading tools such as multiple choice. However, essay-type probing questions help students adopt a deep learning approach. Peer assessments and rubrics can help with grading essay-type questions. However, while the benefits of rubrics and peer assessments are well documented, there is limited research on students’ perceptions in South Africa on the use of rubrics and peer assessments in online environments to facilitate a deep approach to learning. A mixed method approach using a Likert scale and an online qualitative questionnaire was undertaken to explore students’ perceptions of the use of peer assessments with a rubric in an undergraduate module at the University of Johannesburg. Despite a low response rate, four main themes emerged: a clear performance criterion, structured writing, and a deep approach to learning and critical thinking. However, the study also showed limitations of the peer rubric and peer assessments in helping students prepare for formal summative assessment. The results suggest that the rubric and peer assessments, with amendments, could help students adopt a deep approach in online learning environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Letebele Mphahlele, 2022. "Students’ Perception of the Use of a Rubric and Peer Reviews in an Online Learning Environment," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:11:p:503-:d:959404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/11/503/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/11/503/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Booth & Peter Luckett & Rosina Mladenovic, 1999. "The quality of learning in accounting education: the impact of approaches to learning on academic performance," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 277-300.
    2. Byron W. Brown & Carl E. Liedholm, 2002. "Can Web Courses Replace the Classroom in Principles of Microeconomics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 444-448, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John Cullen & Sue Richardson & Rona O'Brien, 2004. "Exploring the teaching potential of empirically-based case studies," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 251-266.
    2. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2011. "Kaderschmieden der Wirtschaft und/oder Universitäten? Der Auftrag der Wirtschaftsuniversitäten und –fakultäten im 21. Jahrhundert," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 12(3), pages 317-337, August.
    3. Roman, Monica & Plopeanu, Aurelian-Petruș, 2021. "The effectiveness of the emergency eLearning during COVID-19 pandemic. The case of higher education in economics in Romania," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    4. Wen-Chi Liao, 2005. "Outsourcing, Inequality, and Cities," 2005 Meeting Papers 904, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    5. Jacques Raynauld, 2005. "New Evidence on the Determinants of Absenteeism Using Linked Employer-Employee Data," Cahiers de recherche 05-06, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    6. M Paula Cacault & Christian Hildebrand & Jérémy Laurent-Lucchetti & Michele Pellizzari, 2021. "Distance Learning in Higher Education: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment [A Randomized Assessment of Online Learning]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 2322-2372.
    7. Adel Ben Youssef & Ludovic Ragni, 2008. "Uses of Information and Communication Technologies in Europe's Higher Education Institutions: From Digital Divides to Digital Trajectories," Post-Print halshs-00937212, HAL.
    8. David Figlio & Mark Rush & Lu Yin, 2013. "Is It Live or Is It Internet? Experimental Estimates of the Effects of Online Instruction on Student Learning," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(4), pages 763-784.
    9. Marann Byrne & Barbara Flood & Pauline Willis, 2004. "Validation of the approaches and study skills inventory for students (assist) using accounting students in the USA and Ireland: a research note," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 449-459.
    10. Becker, Ralf & Proud, Steven, 2018. "Flipping quantitative tutorials," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 59-73.
    11. Li, Yi & Zhang, Wei & Wang, Pengfei, 2021. "Working online or offline: Which is more effective?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    12. Mann, John T. & Henneberry, Shida R., 2014. "Online versus Face-to-Face: Students’ Preferences for College Course Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(1), pages 1-19, February.
    13. Angus Duff, 2004. "Understanding academic performance and progression of first-year accounting and business economics undergraduates: the role of approaches to learning and prior academic achievement," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 409-430.
    14. Christina Chiang & Paul K. Wells & Peter Fieger & Divesh S. Sharma, 2021. "An investigation into student satisfaction, approaches to learning and the learning context in Auditing," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(1), pages 913-936, March.
    15. Marvin T. Batte & D. Lynn Forster & Donald W. Larson, 2003. "An Assessment of Student Acceptance and Performance in Distance Education with Two-Way Interactive Compressed Video," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 524-539.
    16. William Bosshardt & Eric P. Chiang, 2016. "Targeting Teaching Lecture Capture Learning: Do Students Perform Better Compared to Face‐to‐Face Classes?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(3), pages 1021-1038, January.
    17. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad & John J. Siegfried, 2015. "Research on Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 285-325, June.
    18. Marann Byrne & Barbara Flood & Pauline Willis, 2002. "The relationship between learning approaches and learning outcomes: a study of Irish accounting students," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 27-42.
    19. Gu, Xin & Li, Haizheng, 2023. "Does the Closeness of Peers Matter? An Investigation Using Online Training Platform Data and Survey Data," IZA Discussion Papers 15964, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Eric P. Bettinger & Lindsay Fox & Susanna Loeb & Eric S. Taylor, 2017. "Virtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2855-2875, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:15:y:2022:i:11:p:503-:d:959404. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.