A framework for designing, implementing, communicating and researching peer assessment

ABSTRACT The term ‘peer assessment’ may apply to a range of student activities. This imprecision may impact on the uptake of peer assessment pedagogies. To better describe peer assessment approaches, typologies of peer assessment diversity were previously derived from the education literature. However, these typologies have not yet been tested with ‘real-life’ peer assessment examples, nor do they consider broader contextual matters. We present an augmented peer assessment framework, refined through analysing faculty accounts of their peer assessment practices. Our framework subsumes previous attempts to classify peer assessment, and extends them to include technology use, resources and policy, which were new features of our data not present in previous frameworks. In the current higher education climate, these considerations may be crucial for the scalability and success of peer assessment. The framework proposed in this paper provides both precision and concision for researchers and educators in studying and implementing peer assessment.

[1]  P. Black,et al.  Assessment and Classroom Learning , 1998 .

[2]  Ming Ming Diao,et al.  ‘I’m not here to learn how to mark someone else’s stuff’: an investigation of an online peer-to-peer review workshop tool , 2015 .

[3]  Daniel Reinholz,et al.  The assessment cycle: a model for learning through peer assessment , 2016 .

[4]  S. Hanrahan,et al.  Assessing Self- and Peer-assessment: The students' views , 2001 .

[5]  Ibrahim M. Al-Jabri,et al.  Social networking, knowledge sharing, and student learning: The case of university students , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[6]  D. Boud,et al.  Sustainable assessment revisited , 2016 .

[7]  Sue Bennett,et al.  Support for assessment practice: developing the Assessment Design Decisions Framework , 2016 .

[8]  D. Carless,et al.  Developing sustainable feedback practices , 2011 .

[9]  Chin-Chung Tsai,et al.  University Students’ Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward (Online) Peer Assessment , 2006 .

[10]  Avril Thomson,et al.  Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective , 2014 .

[11]  David Boud,et al.  Self and peer assessment in professional education: a preliminary study , 1979 .

[12]  Sue Bennett,et al.  How technology shapes assessment design: Findings from a study of university teachers , 2017, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[13]  Matthew C. Makel,et al.  Facts Are More Important Than Novelty , 2014 .

[14]  Phillip Dawson,et al.  Enabler or inhibitor? Educational technology in self and peer assessment , 2016 .

[15]  Hongli Li,et al.  Peer assessment in the digital age: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings , 2016 .

[16]  G. Joughin.  Assessment, Learning and Judgement in Higher Education: A Critical Review , 2009 .

[17]  N. Falchikov,et al.  Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks , 2000 .

[18]  D. Carless,et al.  Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment , 2006 .

[19]  John B. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does , 1999 .

[20]  Jen Snowball,et al.  Dancing with the devil: formative peer assessment and academic performance , 2013 .

[21]  D. Sluijsmans,et al.  The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review , 1999 .

[22]  N. Falchikov.  Peer Feedback Marking: Developing Peer Assessment , 1995 .

[23]  Justin Cheng,et al.  Peer and self assessment in massive online classes , 2013, ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact..

[24]  Matthew Riddle,et al.  Curriculum mapping to embed graduate capabilities , 2012 .

[25]  E. Molloy,et al.  The role of peer-assisted learning in building evaluative judgement: opportunities in clinical medical education , 2015, Advances in Health Sciences Education.

[26]  Aiming for autonomy: formative peer assessment in a final-year undergraduate course , 2016 .

[27]  K. Topping.  Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities , 1998 .

[28]  Patrick Onghena,et al.  A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum , 2010 .

[29]  J. Strijbos,et al.  Scaffolding Self-Regulated Learning Through Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment: Guidelines for Classroom Implementation , 2016 .

[30]  Margarete Sandelowski,et al.  Mapping the Mixed Methods–Mixed Research Synthesis Terrain , 2012, Journal of mixed methods research.

[31]  Phillip Dawson,et al.  Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice , 2017 .

[32]  Phillip Dawson,et al.  Academics’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education , 2018 .

[33]  Patrick Onghena,et al.  An inventory of peer assessment diversity , 2011 .

[34]  Phillip Dawson,et al.  Beyond a Definition , 2014 .

[35]  D. Carless.  Trust, distrust and their impact on assessment reform , 2009 .

[36]  D. Boud,et al.  Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design , 2013 .

[37]  George Siemens,et al.  Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative , 2014 .

[38]  Wilfried Admiraal,et al.  Design principles and outcomes of peer assessment in higher education , 2006 .

[39]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort , 2013 .