A case study of peer assessment at BSix
Executive Summary
The aim of this research was to examine the impact of using peer assessment to improve students’ writing in one AS-level lesson with eight students. Peer assessment has been used as an ongoing tool with this class for approximately five months. The main findings include:
· Seven of the eight students improved their final score following the use of peer assessment. The maximum score for the exercise was 14 marks. Two students improved their score by nine to ten points, three students by seven points, two by five points and one by one point. One student’s final score however dropped by five points.
· Seven of the eight students felt peer assessment had helped them improve (on a scale of 1-4, in which 1= no improvement and 4= much improvement) by an average of 2.3 to 3.8. Five of these seven students showed a considerable improvement in their final score.
· The most common advantage of peer assessment mentioned by four students was that peer assessment helped them understand how to write better to attract marks. In relation to disadvantages, students were concerned that their peers were not qualified to mark their papers.
Introduction
This small piece of research was commissioned to explore the practice and impact of peer assessment based on the work of one teacher in the Humanities department. This will act as a starting point to BSix Brookehouse Sixth Form College’s commitment to increase the practice and quality of peer assessment within the Humanities department and throughout the college.
According to Sebba et al (2008) peer-assessment involves students assessing each others’ work, through reflection on the goals and what it means to achieve them. Peer-assessment may take place in pairs or groups, where the aim may be as much the development of group processes as the promotion or judgement of individual learning. Peer-assessment has particular value in formative assessment since students ask of each other questions they may be inhibited from asking their teacher, and explain things to each other using familiar language.
The peer assessment model takes three main skills into account: (1) defining assessment criteria: thinking about what is required and referring to the product or process; (2) judging the performance of a peer: reflecting upon and identifying the strengths and weaknesses in a peer's product and writing an assessment report; and (3) providing feedback for future learning: giving constructive feedback about the product of a peer (Sluijsmans, 2002).
A systematic review of research evidence of the impact on students in secondary schools of self and peer assessment was conducted by Sebba et al (2008). They found that student attainment increased across a range of subject areas, students’ self esteem increased, students improved in learning to learn, specifically goal setting, clarifying objectives, taking responsibility for learning and increased confidence.
Methodology
This research was a pilot study, and took the form of a single case study that examined the impact of using peer assessment to improve students’ writing in one AS-level lesson. Peer assessment has been used as an ongoing learning tool with this class for approximately five months. This research project was a collaboration between the class teacher and the BSix researcher-in-residence.
The research was administered in the following way:
Class activity / Research methodWriting exercise : 5 minutes time constrained individual activity (See appendix 1). / Questionnaire administered to students at end of activity to measure their perceptions of their performance (see appendix 2).
Post session: Class teacher to mark work using an objective comparative marking template (see appendix 3).
Individual assessment of peer’s work using mark scheme and recommended writing frame template - annotate script, allocate marks (See appendix 4). / Observation (objective and subjective) of the process by class teacher.
Verbal feedback between peer’s
Giving marks, commenting on script, making recommendations. / Observation (objective and subjective) of the process by class teacher.
Rewrite answer to original question / Questionnaire administered to students at end of activity to measure their perceptions of the impact of peer assessment, and elicit their views on the benefits/challenges of peer assessment (see appendix 5).
Post session:
Class teacher to reflect on process using notes from observation.
Researcher-in-residence to analyse questionnaire results.
Class teacher to mark 2nd draft of student writing using an objective comparative marking template.
Final discussion and analysis by class teacher and researcher-in-residence.
Ethics
Eight of the nine students in the class gave their informed consent to take part in the research.
Student nine did not take part in the research. All participants have been given anonymity in the report writing. See appendix 6 for the letter given to students about the research.
Findings
Student / Pre score(max 14) / Post score
(max 14) / Student perceptions
Scores are based on the mean of five questions that were marked by students on a scale of 1-4
Questionnaire one on initial performance
1= not at all 4= a lot (see appendix 2)
Questionnaire two on impact of peer assessment
1= no improvement 4= much improvement (see appendix 5)
1 / 3 / 13 / Student 1 perceived their initial performance as 2.6. Overall student 1 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 3.8. Student 1’s overall scored increased by 10 points.
2 / 6 / 13 / Student 2 perceived their initial performance 2.4. Overall, student 2 peer felt that peer assessment had only helped them improve by a mean of 1.4 Despite this perception, student 2’s scored increased by 7 points.
3 / 6 / 13 / Student 3 perceived their initial performance as 3.2. Overall student 3 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 3.2. Student 3’s score increased by 7 points.
4 / 13 / 8 / Student 4 perceived their initial performance as 3. Overall student 4 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 3. Student 4’s score however dropped by 5 points.
5 / 0 / 7 / Student 5 perceived their initial performance as 2. Overall student 5 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 3. Student 5's score increased by 7 points.
6 / 3 / 4 / Student 6 perceived their initial performance as 2. Overall student 6 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 2.3 Student 6's score increased by 1 point.
7 / 3 / 8 / Student 7 perceived their initial performance as 1.4. Overall student 7 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 2.4. Student 7's score increased by 5 points.
8 / 1 / 10 / Student 8 perceived their initial performance as 1.8. Overall student 8 felt that peer assessment had helped them improve by a mean of 3. Blank's score increased by 9 points
Discussion
When we compare pre-peer assessment and post-peer assessment scores, we find that seven of the eight students improved their final score. The maximum score for the exercise was 14 marks. Two students improved their score by nine to ten points, three students by seven points, two by five points and one by one point. Although we see some substantial improvements, it should be noted that if students got one aspect of the question right, this gave them the advantage of getting other aspects of the question right.
Of the eight students, one student’s final score however dropped by five points (initial score 13/14 to 8/14). This could be a result of various factors including poor peer assessment feedback, confusion or tiredness.
Overall, seven of the eight students felt peer assessment had helped them improve (on a scale of 1-4, in which 1= no improvement and 4= much improvement) by an average of 2.3 to 3.8. There is a correlation between their perception and their post- peer assessment score in which five of the seven students showed a substantial improvement. As noted above, the final score of the one student (student four) did however drop. The other student (student seven) gave themselves an initial average score of 2, and felt that peer assessment had helped by 2.3. In this case, the final score only improved by one point.
Although the remaining student (student two) did not think peer assessment had helped a great deal (1.4), he/she still produced a piece of writing that resulted in a substantial improvement in their final score.
Students’ perceptions can be analysed in further detail. This can be done by comparing perception of the initial score with perceptions of the impact of peer assessment on improving the writing task.[1] This analysis is based on eight students marking a total of 39 statements on the 1-4 scale.[2]
We find that in the 20 cases where students perceived their initial performance as 1 or 2, they felt that peer assessment had helped them improve, in many cases by 3 or 4. Even in the 12 cases where students scored a 3 for their perceived initial performance, they still found that peer assessment had helped them improve. In one case where perceived initial performance was given the maximum score of 4, peer assessment was still seen to help by 3. Thus the practice of peer assessment appears to be a useful learning tool, even for students who feel they are performing well.
Perception of initial performance(1= not at all 4= a lot) / Perception of impact of peer assessment
(1= no improvement 4= much improvement) / No. of occurrences
1 / 4 / 1
1 / 3 / 2
2 / 4 / 5
2 / 3 / 8
2 / 2 / 4
Total 20
3 / 4 / 3
3 / 3 / 9
Total 12
1
4 / 3 / Total 1
There were four cases where students perceived their initial performance as 1 or 2 and then felt that peer assessment had not helped them improve. This was in relation to the following statements: peer assessment has helped me to structure my paragraph (noted by two students), peer assessment has helped me understand what I need to write (noted by one student) and peer assessment has helped me understand how to write to attract marks’ (noted by one student).
It is not necessarily surprising to find that in two cases, where a student perceived their initial performance was 3, they did not find peer assessment helpful.
Perception of initial performance(1= not at all 4= a lot) / Perception of impact of peer assessment
(1= no improvement 4= much improvement) / No. of occurrences
1 / 1 / 2
2 / 1 / 2
3 / 1 / 2
Students’ perceptions of advantages and disadvantages of peer assessment
Students were also asked to comment, in writing, on the advantages/benefits and disadvantages/challenges of peer assessment. The most common advantages mentioned by four students was that peer assessment helped them understand how to write better to attract marks. In relation to disadvantages, students were concerned that their peers were not qualified to mark their papers.
Students’ feedback is recorded below.
Advantages/benefits of peer assessment
Disadvantages/challenges of peer assessment
Limitations of study
This was a small pilot study conducted with a limited number of students (total=8). It is possible that peer assessment was not the only explanation for improvements in students’ final writing scores. It is therefore important to highlight some of the other variables that could have had an impact on the research findings:
· Unrepresentative sample and no control group to measure impact of other variables.
· Confidence levels regarding knowledge and writing was low before they started the first writing exercise.
· The opportunity to repeat the writing exercise a second time could in itself have resulted in a better score.
· Students may have picked up the answer from reading their peer’s work, rather than through the ability to peer assess.
· Hawthorne effect: students knowing that they were part of a piece of research and therefore using the lunch period to review the exercise and find the right answer (although this should not necessarily be seen as negative).
· The study only measured the immediate impact of peer assessment. It did not measure the medium and long term impact i.e. if students were asked to re-write the paragraph the following day, there is no guarantee that their scores would remain at the higher end of the scale.
The study should therefore be repeated with a control group to see if other variables are having an impact on the study. The study should be extended as part of an action research project to see if the results are replicable over a number of cycles. The findings should be shared with the students who took part in the research and should include discussions about the disadvantages they associate with peer assessment (see appendix 7 for summary of feedback for student participants). The findings should also be shared with other teachers in the college to encourage them to both practice and evaluate peer assessment.
Conclusion: Teacher’s reflections on the process
The explicit aim of this small piece of research was to test the effectiveness of peer assessment in developing academic literacy skills in A-level Sociology; the implicit aim was to establish irrefutable data which would get learners to embrace peer assessment as a learning strategy. To this extent, I believe that both the method and the outcome have achieved these aims. The use of my learners in the process has developed their appreciation of peer assessment as evidenced by their unquestioning willingness to apply this during class ‘named’ paragraph writing exercises.