R75 Student views on Peer Assessment

Diane Garland, Plymouth Business School.

Business Management

students students

% %

1 = strongly agree, through to 5 = strongly disagree, with 3 being neutral 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Describe your reactions to the following statements regarding

peer assessment

·  Fairer assessment method than one mark 21 31 26 13 8 31 31 19 12 6

for all group members regardless of individual contribution

·  Helped to identify strengths of individual members 10 42 23 21 2 17 47 23 12 -

·  Keeping minutes of meetings helped to keep the group on schedule 2 16 16 34 31 12 35 30 12 12

·  Encouraged everyone to participate, workload shared 18 34 16 18 13 35 41 12 - 12

·  Keeping individual logs helped me to recognise the extent of my 10 21 26 26 16 6 17 65 6 6

contribution

Which of the following operational difficulties did you experience with

peer assessment?

·  Inappropriate categories of performance used 8 18 42 26 5 6 35 29 29 -

·  Inappropriate rating scale used 21 26 34 16 2 - 12 65 23 -

·  Keeping minutes of meetings was excessively time consuming 26 34 23 8 8 6 23 29 29 12

·  Keeping an individual log was excessively time consuming 16 23 37 16 8 6 12 64 18 -

·  It was difficult to arrange meetings so all group members could attend 18 31 18 26 5 53 23 - 23 -

Did your group differentiate between members with regard to the

overall group mark?

·  Seemed appropriate to give more marks to those who contributed 57 28 14 - - 54 27 18 - -

more towards the project

·  One/more than one group member did not participate as fully as 71 14 14 - - 27 27 18 9 18

they might have done

·  Differentiation makes little difference to overall individual mark 14 14 43 14 14 - 18 54 9 18

for the project

·  Differentiation makes little difference to overall individual mark 14 14 57 - 14 18 27 36 18 -

for the module

Why did you not differentiate marks?

·  We all worked together, with similar amounts of effort, we all 80 6 3 - 9 62 12 12 12 -

deserved the same mark

·  Didn’t want to upset other group members by haggling over marks 19 9 38 3 29 12 37 - - 50

·  Differentiation makes little difference to overall individual mark 6 20 43 20 10 14 14 43 14 14

for the project

·  Differentiation makes little difference to overall individual mark 6 16 48 19 9 14 28 28 14 14

for the module

·  It is the lecturer’s responsibility to allocate marks, not the students 19 29 22 19 9 - - 75 12 12

R76

Peer Assessment criteria grid to adapt (Plymouth Business School)

Human Behaviour in Organisations (BUS 126)

Module weighting
Assessment 1: / Tutor Mark for Group Project / 20% / (Written report)
Individual Mark / 10% / (Peer assessment)
30% / of total module mark
Group Project:
Student Name:

Please state your individual contribution to the group (may be continued on reverse side).

For each group member in turn, discuss and note their relative rather than absolute contribution to the completion of each component of the group project. Did they contribute above or below average within the group? You can’t all have contributed above average, so make sure your individual marks average the same as the group mark.

Extent of Individual Contribution:
Component of group project / Well below average / Below average / Average / Above average / Well above average
Developing learning contract / -2 / -1 / 0 / +1 / +2
Ideas for case study / -2 / -1 / 0 / +1 / +2
Collection of information / -2 / -1 / 0 / +1 / +2
Analysis of information / -2 / -1 / 0 / +1 / +2
Writing of report / -2 / -1 / 0 / +1 / +2

Tutor mark for group: / ......
Sum of moderation mark (range -10%:+10%): / ......
Individual mark: / ......
Signatures of group members:
...... / ......
...... / ......
...... / ......