The impact of an elaborated assessee’s

role in peer assessment

Presented by

Maham Mudassar

Amna Raja

Hadia Tayyab

Hammad Aslam

• Introduction

• Relation to the literature

• Methodology

• Results

Introduction

WHAT IS PEER ASSESSMENT?

Peer assessment is the assessment of students work by another student. It might be used for grading purpose or formative feedback.

Why do we need it?

• To give others useful feedback and hints on how they can improve their work.

• To help ourselves understand more how our work is marked and reflect on our own work.

• To get ideas on how to improve our own work.

Cont….. • The ability to engage in critical

partnerships, is something which needs to be developed.

• Peer assessment and peer support allow for discussion to take place. This appears to help students to develop skills in writing and in peer support.

What has prompted this study?

The primary purpose of this research is to:-

• Give answers to questions• To solve problems• To explore phenomena• To establish facts, principles and

laws• To add new knowledge to existing

Current state of knowledge

• Self and peer-assessment are being used increasingly in higher education, to help assign grades to student’s work and to help students to learn more effectively.

• However, in spite of this trend there is little in the published literature on how students view these methods.

Why is peer assessment important?

• Holds learner accountable for preparation and team contribution.

• Reinforces learning.

• Opportunity to get the feedback from peers.

• Enhances our communication and interpersonal skills.

What do we learn ?• We are able to develop deep

understanding.

• We are able to learn from others success.

• We can learn from others mistakes.

• Learning is enhanced by assessing in different ways.

Relation to the

literature

Relation to the literature

• Studies show that peer grading enhances student learning.

• Students become more reflective and their learning outcomes improve when they are involved in marking (Stefani 1994).

• Peer feedback is more effective than grading in peer assessment (Liu and Carless 2006).

• Peer feedback can improve the learning of both assessors and assessees by sharpening the critical thinking skills of the assessors and by providing timely feedback to the assessee’s (Lucking 2008).

Cont……• When assessors give cognitive feedback they summarize arguments, identify problems, offer solutions, and explicate comments (Hattie 2007).

• High school students report that online positive feedback significantly contributes to their learning (Tsai 2007).

Methodology

APPROACH

This study reports the effects of peer assessment, in the form of peer grading and peer feedback, on students learning.

Methods• A total of 82 students were selected

• Two groups were made (n1=40) and (n2=42)

• One group was assigned as treatment group (presence of back–feedback)

• Other one was assigned as control group (absence of back feedback form)

• Hypothesis was taken.

• T-test was done.

Technique• Peer-feedback form was developed by

the researcher.

• Back-feedback form was developed by researcher.

• Learners were trained on doing assessment.

• Both groups were given Peer-feedback forms.

• Only treatment group receive Back-feedback form.

Hypothesis

We assume that treatment group perform better than control group.

t-test t-test compares the actual difference

between two means in relation to the variation in the data (expressed as the standard deviation of the difference between the means).

1-We need to construct a null hypothesis.

2-List the data for samples.

3-Record the number (n).

4-Calculate mean of each sample.

5-Calculate standard deviation.

Null Hypothesis

There is no difference in the performance of treatment group and the control group.

Analysis• T-test was done to compare the levels

of:-

1- Metacognitive awareness

2-Performance

3- Attitude• The results were compared of

treatment group and control group.

Results

t-value• If your t-value has probability

(p<0.05) than your null hypothesis is rejected and your data is correct.

• If your t-value has (p>0.05) so your null hypothesis is correct and your data is inaccurate.

Preliminary Analysis

Only three dependent variables were measured using t-test:-

1.Attitude

2.Metacognitive awareness

3.performance

Descriptive statistics for each measurement

Control group Treatment group

Control groupbefore

after

Treatment group

after

Metacognitive Awareness

• An independent t-test sample.

• Alpha level/(probability)p< 0.05

• Treatment group reported more metacognitive awareness in learning than the control group.

• (t[80] = 3.49, p < 0.05)

Performance

The result indicated that the students who were in the treatment showed better performance in making a final concept map than the students in the control group.

Attitude

• Treatment group attitude towards peer assessment was better than that of control group.

• Out of 82 students only 68 provided opinion about peer assessment.

• ‘the peer assessment was fun and easy’

• Critical and positive feedback

Result

Our null hypothesis is rejected as probability is less than 0.05 so our assumption is correct that treatment group performs better than control group.

Affects of peer assessment

• By filling out the Back-Feedback Form, students paid more attention in planning their projects and assignments

• They learnt and understood much better than control group students.

Understandings• Those who gave more feedback gained

more from the project process.• Grading improved assessor’s

understanding and their own performance individually.

• It is quite reasonable that identifying problems and making suggestions leads assessors to engage in cognitive and logical activities.

• They gained knowledge and understanding in their own projects by assessing the projects of peers.

Implications and Future study

• Research should include more qualitative data.

• Assessment should be more interactive.

Question arises

1. Are peer grading activities related to the quality of the final project?

2. Are different types of affective feedback related to the quality of the final projects for both assessors and assessees?