Peer discussions play a major role in students’ collaborative problem-solving activity. These discussions provide researchers and teachers with a wealth of information about the students' reasoning. To analyse such discussions, different theoretical lenses are available, such as Schoenfeld’s problem solving model, the Florida Taxonomy of Cognitive Behaviour, and the Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis. The question is, however, how these three perspectives can complement each other. To investigate this, the discussion between four students was analysed through the three lenses. Results indicate that these frameworks are both complementary and connected. This connection allows an in-depth analysis of the discussion and reveals possibilities and limitations for an integration of the three models, which will guide future discussions’ analyses in our study.
From the article: "Whilst the importance of online peer feedback and writing argumentative essays for students in higher education is unquestionable, there is a need for further research into whether and the extent to which female and male students differ with regard to their argumentative feedback, essay writing, and content learning in online settings. The current study used a pre-test, post-test design to explore the extent to which female and male students differ regarding their argumentative feedback quality, essay writing and content learning in an online environment. Participants were 201 BSc biotechnology students who wrote an argumentative essay, engaged in argumentative peer feedback with learning partners in the form of triads and finally revised their original argumentative essay. The findings revealed differences between females and males in terms of the quality of their argumentative feedback. Female students provided higher-quality argumentative feedback than male students. Although all students improved their argumentative essay quality and also knowledge content from pre-test to post-test, these improvements were not significantly different between females and males. Explanations for these findings and recommendations are provided"
MULTIFILE
Although near-peer role modeling (NPRM) has been suggested as an effective pedagogical intervention for boosting confidence, motivation, and self-efficacy, few studies have examined its connection with learner needs and well-being utilizing an established psychological framework. The present study investigates the pedagogical role of NPRM within English classes in Japanese higher education from the perspective of basic psychological need (BPN) satisfaction and frustration. In this two-phase explanatory mixed methods study, two quantitative scales were utilized to assess the significance of the connections between NPRM and six subcategories of BPN satisfaction or frustration. Subsequently, a qualitative investigation with a more limited sample size was conducted to elucidate and expand upon these associations. The quantitative findings revealed NPRM to be a significant predictor of students’ autonomy and relatedness satisfaction and exhibited a negative correlation with students' autonomy and relatedness frustration. However, no discernible association was observed between NPRM and competence satisfaction or frustration. The qualitative data revealed that the students’ mixed feelings of competence may have stemmed from low confidence and L2 self-concept with some students comparing themselves unfavorably to near-peer role models. The study highlights the need for NPRM interventions to be accompanied by instruction related to learner beliefs or growth mindsets.
