Usha Nair Tangaraju, Renuka V. Sathasivam, Rose Amnah bt. Abd Raub University Malaya [email protected] Abstract Teachers who implement peer assessment (PA) in their classrooms can give rise to learner autonomy which is one of the desirable skills for 21 st century. Nevertheless, research on PA is rather underexplored. Research indicates that teachers do not implement PA strategies due to various reasons and one such reason is the lack of support and guidance. This paper is part of a larger study that aims to examine how teachers implement PA as they undergo a Collaborative Professional Development intervention. In this study, only two teachers would be discussed. Theis intervention involves researchers taking into consideration the teachers ideas, experiences and lesson plans and showing the teachersm ways on how they may implement some of the PA strategies. This paper will focus on teachers implementation of PA strategies in their classrooms. Three primary science teachers took part in this study. Qualitative data collection techniques were used such as Cclassroom observations and , interview sessions were the main source of data.s and document analysis. The fFindings revealed that though theall three teachers up-took the suggestions from the researchers but they were only able to superficially implement peer assessment strategies especially when the strategy required students to take responsibility for their own learning and teachers to relinquish their central role. and attempted to implement PA however, only two teachers were able to so successfully. For example, the teachers had instructed their students to mark each others work by finding the correct answers from various resources. However, owever, Hone teacher was unable to implement this strategy successfully in the classroom as her students were too dependent on her in their learning. The findings suggest that teachers do require continuous support in the implementation of PA strategies and the support preferable tailor-made for individual teachers. Keywords Peer Assessment, Learner Autonomy, Collaborative Professional Development, Development, Science teachers Primary Science Teachers Implementation of Peer Assessment in a Collaborative Professional Development Research has shown that the effectiveness of peer assessment largely depends on the quality of teachers capability to develop student interaction (Sluijsmans Prins, 2006). Peer assessment (PA) becomes an opportunity for teachers to learn about how effective their own teaching by observing students understanding of content and skills during the students dialogical interactions with their peers (Black Wiliam, 1998). This student-led assessment practices have potential to positively affect achievement and can be an effective hands-on learning experience (Brown, 2013). Such peer assessment activities, as summarizing information, critiquing the work of peers, giving and receiving feedback, correcting errors, questioning thought processes and justifications, and explaining rationales have been especially beneficial in promoting academic achievement (Boud, D., Falchikov, N. 2006) Though research has shown that peer assessment is useful in improving teaching and learning, teachers are still hesitantting to implement these strategies in their classrooms (Rozi, 2013). This hesitation is more apparent in the Asian culture where teachers believe that implementing peer assessment is akin to teachers abandoning their teaching responsibilities and handing them over to the students (Faizah, M. 2011). Teachers in this culture who have valued their position as the central of student learning are concern if their students are indeed capable of providing accurate, appropriate and meaningful feedback (Davies, 2000 Ho Savignon, 2007 Kaufman Schunn, 2011 Liu Carless, 2006 Roskams, 1999) Moreover, these teachers assume that studentsstudents involvement in their learning would take time and effort as teachers find it difficult to make their students to talk. This is mainly due to students are rarely given the opportunity to voice their opinion in the learning process (Thompson, 2009). In the context of young children where they are innately curious and out-spoken but primary teachers are seen as rarely allowing these students to work together in small groups or with peers because they are mindful of classroom management. To overcome this issue, teachers may create groups of students but under the strict direction of the teacher, so student interactions are limited. These ill-mannered practises of teachers are highly unlikely to foster learning autonomy in these children (Gillies Boyle, 2010). Therefore, this indicates that teachers are generally lost on how to create environment/opportunity for their students to take ownership of their own learning. Moreover, these teachers have the notion that peer assessment would lead to negative impact on their students learning (Kim, Lim Habib, 2010). With these deep-rooted beliefs in teachers regarding peer assessment would most likely translates to teachers believing that peer assessment is an ineffective pedagogy (Topping, 2009). With the deep-rooted beliefs about peer assessment, it is difficult to change teachers mind-set in a single workshop or in a days training. Thus to ensure that teachers successful implementation of peer assessment strategies in their classrooms, the The generic professional development programmes or the one-day off-site workshops would have minimal impact on teachers practices. Teachers find implementing peer assessment adds more work for them in preparing relevant teaching materials as they are already tied down in pressure of completing syllabus on time. Blatchford, Kutnick, Baines, and Galtin (2003) recognised the difficulties teachers encounter in trying to introduce peer assessment and argued strongly that if it is to be used successfully in classrooms, the introduction of this strategy to teachers need to be designed appropriately. They added that the structure of professional development need to show teachers how students are taught the relevant skills, why teacher collaboration is vital and the need to develop organized lessons and tasks. This means that professional development should have the elements of active teacher learning including hands-on practice, interactive feedback and discussions collaboration and individualisation of teachers learning goals and ownership of the process by the teachers themselves which are the hallmark of a successful professional development programme (Andersson Palm, 2017 Heitink ,VanHeitink, Van der Kleij, Veldkamp, Schildkamp Kippers, 2016). the context in which it is to be introduced needs to be prepared, students need to be taught the appropriate interactional skills, teachers need to be taught how to work with groups, and the lessons and tasks need to be well organized. This would require time, resources and collaboration. In fact, reviews of professional development on peer assessment have claimed that the focus on teaching and learning the subject matter, inclusion of instructional resources, materials and examples active teacher learning including hands-on practice, interactive feedback and discussions collaboration and individualisation of teachers learning goals and personalized by the teachers themselves are the hallmark of a successful professional development programme (Andersson Palm, 2017 Heitink ,Van der Kleij, Veldkamp, Schildkamp Kippers, 2016). Therefore, collaborative professional development programme points to a more effective way of developing and sustaining teachers implementation of peer assessment strategies in the classroom. The term collaborative could come to mean the collaboration between experts with the teachers or the collaboration between teachers. For instance, Gillies and Boyle (2010) compared a Collaborative Professional Development programme involving two groups collaboration between an expert with teachers and the other, collaboration among colleagues who supported each other. The study found that the group of teachers that had input from an external expert made significantly more changes and their students showed greater increment in academic attainment than the group which only used peer support. Similarly, in a study by Butler (2004) where teachers were introduced to an instructional program through a workshop and collaborated with colleagues and researchers throughout the two years it was found that the participating teachers gained significantly in sustainable practices. These teachers were able to reflect on their practices, construct new knowledge about teaching, and made positive changes to their teaching practice. In fact, data from teacher interviews from this study, noted two primary mechanisms that supported the change time to reflect on teaching practice and structured time for collaboration (Butler, 2004). With the deep-rooted beliefs about peer assessment, it is difficult to change teachers mind-set in a single workshop or in a days training, what teachers need is prolonged support. Thus, this study plans to answer the following research question How is teachers implementation of peer assessment strategies when supported by a investigate how teachers implement peer assessment through a Collaborative Professional Development (CPD) intervention. Method This study utilized a qualitative data collection techniques to gain insights into teachers implementation of peer assessment (PA) as they underwent a Collaborative Professional Development (CPD) intervention. Participants In the larger study, tThree teachers, Ali, Kala and Zeti (pseudonyms) participated in this study. All three teachers taught in a semi-urban primary school where most of their students are from low socio-economic background. However, for this study only two teachers will be discussed Zeti and Kala. Ali and Kala taught Year 4 science where else Zeti taught Year 1 science. Ali has a degree in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) and has only six months of experience teaching science. Zeti has a degree in Teaching and six years of teaching experience. Kala has a degree in Science but pursue a Diploma Pendidikan Lepasan Ijazah (DPLI) and has 13 years of teaching science. Zeti and Kala have held positions such as Head of Science. All teachers have attended courses on assessment. Data Collection techniques This study utilized a qualitative data collection techniques that included classroom observations and, interview sessions and document analysis. Classroom Observations The classroom observations were conducted to gain insights on how teachers have up taken suggestions by the researchers on the implementation of peer assessment strategies. The classroom observation was done using a peer assessment observation protocol. The protocol was prepared based on literature review on peer assessment (Harris, L. R. and G. T. L. Brown, (2013). In the context of this study, there were six strategies of peer assessment that were introduced to these teachers and support was give as these teachers embed the practices in their daily lessons. Table 1 shows the six strategies of peer assessment in the context of this study. Although there were six strategies in the peer assessment observation protocol, teachers were not expected to embed all six strategies in one lesson but to do so when the need arises. StrategyDescription1Teachers encourage students to listen to students responses to questions and presentations made in class and to ask questions on points that they do not understand. 2Teachers use examples of work from anonymous students and ask their peers to suggest possible ways of improving the work and how they would meet the learning outcomes. 3Teachers ask students to use the expected outcomes to comment on strengths of each others work and to identify areas for improvement.4Teachers ask students to mark each others work but without giving them the answer. Instead, ask them to find the correct answers from available resources.5Teachers ask students to write their own questions on a topic to match the expected learning outcomes and in addition provide answers to others questions. 6Teachers ask students to decide whether they think an answer is reasonable, whether they can add to the answer, or whether they would have given another answer. Table 1 Six strategies of peer assessment observation protocol The researcher was a non-participating observer. In addition, the researcher also took field notes. For example, of the physical setting of the classroom, the students learning tasks, and the teacher blackboard writings were all recorded. Interview sessions In the larger study, there were two type of interview sessions. Firstly, there were semi-structured interviews that done at the beginning and at the end of the research. The former was done to gain teachers knowledge about peer assessment and the latter to elicit teachers perception about the intervention. Secondly, and the focus on this study, are interview sessions done before and after each lesson. These interview sessions can be considered as discussions. There are usually open-ended and focused on teachers preparation of the lesson plan and the reflection about the implementation of peer assessment strategies after the lessons. In the former, the researcher listens for justifications and offers suggestions on how to improve the lesson plan and the latter, where the teachers discuss their achievements and shortfalls of the implementation of the PA strategies for that lesson. Some of the questions asked for these open-ended interview protocol were.What is your opinion on your lesson…How do you think you want to improve your lesson The Collaborative Professional Development (CPD) Intervention The CPD intervention begin with an half day training by the researchers to explain the aims of the research and to familiarize the teachers with the concept of peers assessment, its strategies, its positive influence on student learning and some success stories. After this training, the researcher will observed each science teachers lesson to see how the teacher conducteds the science lesson. During the lesson, researcher took field notes and audio taped the classroom discourse. After the lesson ended, the researcher interviewed the teacher and the collaboration process takes place. The research would find out how the teachers plans to move forward with her lesson and if he/she plans to embed any peer assessment strategies. At this point, the researcher would also give her input and suggestions on which strategies aspect of peer assessment the teacher could most likely embed based on the discussion. These suggestions are not compulsory to be followed by the teachers. Based on these teaching objectives the teacher drafts the next lesson plan and sends the lesson plan via email for the researcher to review. The researcher reviews the lesson plan and provides more specific suggestions and options for the teacher. The teacher redoes the lesson plan based on the suggestion (if they agree). During the prepared lesson, the researcher observes the lesson. Once the lesson is completed, the teachers would reflect on that lesson with the researcher. The researcher would ask questions to elicit how the teacher perceived her lesson and how she would be liked to be supported. The discussions will focus on the strengths and areas for improvement of the implemented peer assessment lesson. The strengths and areas for improvement of the peer assessment lesson will be identified so that these best practices will be corrected and be continued in the next peer assessment lesson. This process will be repeated for all other lessons. Results The results are presented as descriptive events on how science teachers implement peer assessment based on the six strategies of peer assessment. In the larger study, all six strategies would be discussed howeverhowever, for this study only two of the strategies of peer assessment would be discussed. They are Strategy 4 Teachers ask students to mark each others work but without giving them the answer. Instead, ask them to find the correct answers from available resources and Strategy 5 Teachers ask students to write their own questions on a topic to match the expected learning outcomes and in addition provide answers to others questions. These two aspects will be discussed in terms of how the teachers attempted to implement them in the classroom. Strategy 4 Teacher Zeti was teaching Year 1 students on lesson Soil. Zeti had told her students to bring some soil from home. Zeti had decided to try pair work where she randomly choose pairs of students to work together to answer a set of questions that she had written on the board. The questions are as follows How many types of soil do you know Name the soils that you know. Are there 3 types of soil What is the use of garden soil Where can sandy soil be found Clay soil can be used to do flower pot (FN4, Zeti) According to Zeti, she had put up these questions to gain students prior knowledge. However, during the implementation of this strategy, Zeti found it difficult to control her students. Her students were talking but they were not focusing on the questions given to them. To counter this, Zeti told her students to keep away everything and to take out one pencil and to write the answer on the paper given. The pace of the lesson was slow and Zeti had to keep reminding her students to write down the answers. Some of the pairs were discussing the questions. S1 Do you know how many soils S2 .I think only no I think only 2 typesThree types of soil that you know.. S1 What is garden soil I think it is used in garden.but I am not sure how it looks like S2 I think clay soil is used in gardenMy mother plants vegetables at home I saw the soil was brown in colour…. (OBS4, Zeti) However, there were still pairs that were hesitantting to talk, not sure of what to discuss and were just waiting for teachers answer. Although the questions posted by the Zeti wasquestions posted by the Zeti were rather straightforward, many students had problems answering them. Some students wrote they know 3 types but they only name 2 soils. For the question Are there three types of soil Instead of answering yes or no, students named the soil. (FN4, Zeti) Throughout this process, Zeti continuously reminded her students on the importance of discussions with their peers and the need to help each other. Once the discussions in pairs were completed, Zeti played a video about soil for students to watch. The video explained Why is garden soil the best soil for planting and then Zeti asked some questions. Zeti Which is the best soil for planting Ss Garden soil. (OBS4, Zeti) At this point, Zeti asked the students to exchange their worksheet with another pair to mark the answers. Zeti instructed the students to write their names on the work sheet and to hand over their worksheet to another group. This simple process took a long time because students doing it for the first time. This was followed by Zeti informing her students that they are to mark their peers work. Zeti Class, now you are going to mark your friends worksheet. If your friends answer is correct put a tick but do not erase the answer written there, do you understand Class Yes teacher (OBS4,Zeti) She told them to take out colour pencil to mark. Zeti told her students not to worry if their answers are wrong as they had not watch the video at that time. Zeti asked a student to answer the first question. Zeti Puteri, what is the answer on your paper Puteri Three, teacher (OBS4, Zeti) She did so with a few more pairs. The students then put a tick for the correct answer and a cross for the wrong one in their respective worksheet. For another question, Zeti asked Amin to read his answers. Zeti Amin, can you read the answers Amin Clay soilerrfertilize soil.teacher. Zeti Fertilize soil Did you hear that in the video just now Amin No teacher. (OBS4, Zeti) The students were able to answer the questions as Zeti provided them with the right answer directly or rather indirectly. Moreover, the questions were also prepared by Zeti. Zeti was not able to successfully implement this peer assessment strategy as she provided the answers and questions and simply asked her students to mark the answers. Since this was a new activity for the students, they seem to want to get to correct answers. It was observed that some students were trying to erase the wrong answer and put in the correct one. Some students were not sure what to do when the worksheet that they were correcting did not have any answers. There were alsoSome students got very sensitive of getting wrong answer. Zeti was not truly practicing peer assessment as she did not ask the students to look for the right answers and explain that to their peers. Strategy 5 When Kala taught Year 4 science topic on Solar system, she did not use the conventional method. In Solar system topicthis topic there were many subtopics, so Kala had asked students to pick one subtopic for each group of 3 to 4 students. She told the students to do a poster presentation on the subtopic they selected. She also asked the students to create their own questions based on the learning outcomes of their subtopic. They were also reminded that they will need to answer their peers questions after their presentation. After the first group had presented, Kala added some information that they had missed. She then asked to class if they had any questions. The whole class was silent. The presenting group was asked to give the prepared questions to their classmates. Ali Since when solar system existed The students were all quiet. Since the students were quiet, Kala asked the presenting group if they had explained the question in their presentation. Teacher Did you explain in your presentation earlier Ali No teacher Teacher HmmmmYou need to ask questions based on your presentation ok next question please. (OBS2, Kala) Kala initiated the lesson with a novbelle idea of providing autonomy to her students by allowing them to do presentation and learning through peer interaction. However, she could not truly show that she truly did peer assessment because she seem to take control of the classroom and wanted a more straight forward rather than a messy discourse. For example, she could have asked her students why they are not answering the question or even to askhe Ali as to why he thinks his peers could not answer the question. The presentation continued with next group. Teacher stress again that students need to ask question based on the presentation. During the explanation, one of the student said Siti The sunlight can make us blind. KalaTeacher (Her eyes became big) What….sunlight can make us blind Class, sunlight can make us blind Now we are in the class, there is sunlightare we getting blind Ss Class Silent Kala Teacher Who can correct the sentence I understand what she is saying but the sentence is not correct. Who can correct it Farid We can become blind if we go nearer to the sun. Kala Teacher Not go nearer but seeing too long with our naked eyes. Why we cannot see too long Ss Class Too Bright. (OBS2, Kala) In the following classroom discourse Kala attempted to probe for explanation. When it was discovered that Siti stated that the sunlight can make us blind, she asked the class if anyone could correct that statement. Farid gave a more valid answer but instead of asking the students to enhance the quality of thate answer, Kala did it herself.Teacher asked the group to continue with the questions. Siti What is the diameter of sun Teacher (teacher paused and asked the students) Do you know what is diameter Class (Students were silent)some said distance between..err. Teacher Have you played football before Every round thing has a diameter. From one point to the other one is called diameter. (Teacher drew the picture on the board) (OBS2, Kala) The classroom discourse continued with otheranother groups presentation. When it came to question-and-answer session, Kala seem to elicit the correct answers from her students without asking them for justifications as to why the students gave the wrong answers.Students continued with other questions Zul What is the usual phenomena happening to sun Chan hmmm. Kala Teacher Dont know Your friends already explain in their presentation just now. I find another personok Darus answer Darus Eeclipse Kala Teacher Eclipse person.Sara you answer Sara Sun spot Kala Teacher Yes correct. See this information is not in textbook but your friends have explained in their presentation just now. So it is an extraextra information for all of you, which is good. (OBS2, Kala) Since not much elaboration and guidelinesinput was given before the presentation, many students asked direct questions i.e. mostly factual or simply yes or no. ThusThus, it was Kala who ended up asking the higher order questions. Teacher asked next group to continue their presentation. This group presented on Earth. Teacher reminded again to students not to read from paper but to explain the facts on their own. After presenting, students continued to ask questions. Abu Planet mars is the biggest, yes or no Teacher Too easy your question, ask another one Abu How long does the mars takes time to go around the sun Siti Teacher this question is not in the presentation Teacher It is ok.answer in the textbookjust answer Siti Dont know teacher. Teacher Ok , find later..another question, please Abu Name the hottest planet. Halim Venus Abu Does the hottest planet have water vapour Halim Noyes Kala Teacher Ok good but I want to add question. Why, no water vapour Halim Because it is too hot teacher. Kala Teacher Oh very good, sit down. (OBS 2, Kala) Teacher Kala although tried her best to implement peer assessment but ended up she controlled the whole lesson overall. During lesson teacher observed that students were also not sure on how to make questions based on the topic and the questions has no quality. Students created more questions for a yes or no answer instead of making a question where an explanation is needed. They just take sentences from textbook, ask other students and was not aware that they need an answer for that question. Some questions were just done very simple and not very important questions. Teacher also notice that students like to ask difficult questions. For example, what is the diameter of the planets which is not necessary for them to know. This happens although the teacher has explained the way to do earlier. So, when they ask, other students are not sure of what they are asking. Later in an interview session Kala stated that she Teacher was not happy with the way the presentation was done. Students were just reading from the poster instead of explaining. Thus, Kala said her students felt Teacher and other students were feeling very bored and was not interested. She discovered that her students did not haveThey were lackeding presentation skills and she understood becauseas many of them have never been exposed to this type of learning. and some of them were not presented before. Kala also realized that her students were not asking the right type of questions either out of the syllabus or were too easy. Discussion and Conclusion Zeti had managed to change her normal whole class interaction to smaller group with the element of peer assessment. Zeti mentioned that peer activities were beneficial as it gave students the chance to discuss the concept with their peers. However, she took charge of providing the correct answers and students seemed anxious to ensure that they got the right answers but erasing the wrong ones. Though the teacher attempted to use the strategies but her beliefs as knowledge provider seem prevalent. The ability for teachers to allow students to be more active in their learning seems rather difficult to be carried (Davies, 2000 Ho Savignon, 2007 Kaufman Schunn, 2011 Liu Carless, 2006 Roskams, 1999). From this study the findings show that although the teachers are practicing peer assessment, but they still need continues support from external expertise in implementing the strategies. For instance, Kala seem hesitant to give student autonomy when the students were doing their presentation. Kala kept interrupting and taking control of the students presentation and during their question and answer time. Studies have shown that to implement peer assessment practices in classroom, teachers need to have the confident to give autonomy to students and to any challenges that arise from that (Gillies Boyle, 2010). ThusThus, even with externalpertise support the teacher was not able to conduct effective peer assessment and highly unlikely to see the positive impact of these strategies. to foster learning autonomy in these children. Zeti had managed to change her normal whole class interaction to smaller group with the element of peer assessment. Zeti mentioned that peer activities were beneficial as it gave students the chance to discuss the concept with their peers. However, she took charge of providing the correct answers and students seemed anxious to ensure that they got the right answers but erasing the wrong answers. Though the teacher attempted to use the strategies but her beliefs as knowledge provider seem prevalent. The ability for teachers to allow students to be more active in their learning seem rather difficult to be carried (Davies, 2000 Ho Savignon, 2007 Kaufman Schunn, 2011 Liu Carless, 2006 Roskams, 1999). Teachers operating in Eastern culture seem to value their position as the central of student learning or perhaps they wereare concern if their students are indeed capable of providing accurate, appropriate and meaningful feedback. Thus, prolong guidance and support is needed to engage teachers to conduct effective peer assessment strategies (Andersson, C., Palm, T, 2017)(XXX). Consistent peer assessment practice, with the support of external expertise may lead to a good impact on to development of autonomy learners (Cordingley P, Bell M, Isham C, Evans D, Firth A, 2007) (XXX) much needed still for the two-first century learners.. During the lesson students did not ask questions based on presentation as this was their first time of doing such activities. This has lead other students to be unable to understand of what is happening and are not able to ask questions to their peers. This may be fix by trying out rubric method, that means teacher sets the criteria for the presentation and give some guideline on making questions. Reference Andersson, C., Palm, T. (2017). The impact of formative assessment on student achievement A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a comprehensive professional development programme. Learning and Instruction, 49, 92102. Black, P., Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74 Boud, D., Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Special Issue Learning-oriented assessment Principles and practice. Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399-413. Butler (2004) Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 435455 Cordingley P, Bell M, Isham C, Evans D, Firth A (2007) What do specialists do in CPD programmes for which there is evidence of positive outcomes for pupils and teachers Report. In Research Evidence in Education Library. London EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London Davies, P. (2000). Computerized Peer Assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 346-355. Faizah, M. (2011). School-based assessment in Malaysian schools The concerns of English teachers. Journal of US-China Education Review, 8(10), 1-15. Gillies, R. M. and M. Boyle (2010). Teachers reflections on cooperative learning Issues of implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education 26(4) 933-940. Harris, L. R. and G. T. L. Brown (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning Case studies into teachers implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education 36 101-111. Kaufman, J., Schunn, C. (2011). Students perceptions about peer assessment for writing their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387-406. Kim, H. K., Lim, L., Habib, M. (2010). Building Teachers Capacity in Classroom-Based Formative Assessment. Paper presented at the 36th International Association for Educational Assessment (IAEA) Annual Conference Bangkok,Thailand. Liu, N.-F., Carless, D. (2006). Peer Feedback The Learning Element of Peer Assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290. Roskams, T. (1999). Chinese Efl Students Attitudes To Peer Feedback and Peer Assessment in an Extended Pairwork Setting. RELC Journal, 30(1), 79-123. Rozi (2013) Peer feedback A case study of assessment for learning in a Singaporean classroom. GSE Journal of Education 2013, (ISSN 2289-3970). Sluijsmans, D. and F. Prins (2006). A conceptual framework for integrating peer assessment in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation 32(1) 6-22. Rozi, 2013). Thompson, Paul. (2009). Consulting Secondary School Pupils about Their Learning. Oxford Review of Education, 35(6), 671-687. Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27. PAGE MERGEFORMAT 11 Y, B8L 1(IzZYrH9pd4n(KgVB,lDAeX)Ly5otebW3gpj/gQjZTae9i5j5fE514g7vnO( ,[email protected] /[email protected] 6Q