Search results

As global issues such as climate change, economic growth, social equality and the wealth gap are widely discussed, education for sustainable development (ESD) allows every human being to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values necessary to shape a sustainable future. It also requires participatory teaching and learning methods that motivate and empower learners to change their behavior and take action for sustainable development. Teachers have begun rating pupils based on peer assessment for open evaluation. Peer assessment enables students to transition from passive to active feedback recipients. The assessors improve critical thinking and encourage introspection, resulting in more significant recommendations. However, the quality of peer assessment is variable, resulting in reviewers not recognizing the remarks of other reviewers, therefore the benefits of peer assessment cannot be fulfilled. In the past, researchers frequently employed post-event questionnaires to examine the effects of peer assessment on learning effectiveness, which did not accurately reflect the quality of peer assessment in real time.

This study employs a multi-label model and develops a self-feedback system in order to use the AIOLPA system in the classroom to enhance students' learning efficacy and the validity of peer assessment.

The research findings indicate that the better peer assessment through the rapid feedback system, for the evaluator, encourages more self-reflection and attempts to provide more ideas, so bringing the peer rating closer to the instructor rating and assisting the evaluator. Improve self-evaluation and critical thinking for the evaluator, peers make suggestions and comments to help improve the work and support the growth of students' learning effectiveness, which can lead to more suggestions and an increase in the work’s quality.

ESD consequently promotes competencies like critical thinking, imagining future scenarios and making decisions in a collaborative way. This study builds an online peer assessment system with a self-feedback mechanism capable of classifying peer comments, comparing them with scores in a consistent manner and providing prompt feedback to critics.

The Giving Voice to Values (GVV) program takes a unique approach to ethics education by shifting the focus away from a philosophical analysis of why actions are unethical to a focus on how individuals can effectively voice their values to resolve ethical conflict. The authors explore how peer feedback and peer assessment, when implemented within a GVV module, can increase students’ understanding of ways to resolve ethical dilemmas, increase student engagement, and increase confidence in confronting unethical actions. The findings indicate that the use of peer feedback and assessment increases students’ understanding of ways to resolve ethical dilemmas, increases confidence in confronting unethical actions, and student attitudes suggest that assessing peers is a way to learn from each other and enhances interaction/engagement of students in the course. The teaching methods described in this study can easily be implemented in any specific discipline or accounting ethics course.

Self‐ and peer assessment has proved effective in promoting the development of teamwork and other professional skills in undergraduate students. However, in previous research approximately 30 percent of students reported that its use produced no perceived improvement in their teamwork experience. It was hypothesised that a significant number of these students were probably members of a team that would have functioned well without self‐ and peer assessment and hence the process did not improve their teamwork experience. This paper aims to report the testing of this hypothesis.

The paper reviews some of the literature on self‐ and peer assessment, outlines the online self‐ and peer assessment tool SPARK^PLUS, and analyses the results of a post‐subject survey of students in a large multi‐disciplinary engineering design subject.

It was found that students who were neutral as to whether self‐ and peer assessment improved their teamwork experience cannot be assumed to be members of well‐functioning teams.

To increase the benefits for all students it is recommended that self‐ and peer assessment focuses on collaborative peer learning, not just assessment of team contributions. Furthermore, it is recommended that feedback sessions be focused on learning not just assessment outcomes and graduate attribute development should be recorded and tracked by linking development to categories required for professional accreditation.

Reports examining graduate employment issues suggest that employers are concerned by the lack of employability skills exhibited by entry‐level job applications. It is also suggested that employers consider it the responsibility of educational institutions to develop such skills. The current study seeks to identify peer assessment as a potential strategy for developing employability skills and aims to examine – from a students' perspective – the process of introducing peer assessment into higher education teaching programmes.

The focus of the study was on the assessment of students' attitudes towards both being assessed by and assessing other students' work. Data were gathered from a sample of undergraduate students following a structured peer assessment exercise.

In line with previous work, the study found that students expressed a positive attitude towards peer assessment but had concerns relating to their capability to assess peers and to the responsibility associated with assessing peers.

Results suggest that, whilst students would accept peer assessment as an element of their course, its introduction at least should focus on the development of evaluative skills (i.e. emphasising learning rather than assessment) and provide support to alleviate an onerous sense of responsibility. It is concluded that, if the value of peer assessment – in terms of employability skill development – is accepted, then it should be adopted as regular practice on undergraduate programmes wishing to equip students with a complete repertoire of employment‐relevant skills.

The paper provides useful information on developing employability skills among students in higher education through peer assessment.

Unlike many other quantitative characteristics used to determine higher education rankings, opinion-based peer assessment scores and the factors that may influence them are not well understood. Using peer scores of US colleges of engineering as reported annually in US News and World Report (USNews) rankings, the purpose of this paper is to provide some insights into peer assessments by statistically identifying factors that influence them.

With highly detailed data, a random parameters linear regression is estimated to statistically identify the factors determining a college of engineering’s average USNews peer assessment score.

The findings show that a wide variety of college- and university-specific attributes influence average peer impressions of a university’s college of engineering including the size of the faculty, the quality of admitted students and the quality of the faculty measured by their citation data and other factors.

The paper demonstrates that average peer assessment scores can be readily and accurately predicted with observable data on the college of engineering and the university as a whole. In addition, the individual parameter estimates from the statistical modeling in this paper provide insights as to how specific college and university attributes can help guide policies to improve an individual college’s average peer assessment scores and its overall ranking.

The purpose of this paper is to check the veracity of educators’ apprehensions about peer assessments by comparing them with the actual peer assessment scores. It also explores the levels of satisfaction and current usage of peer assessment tools among educators.

The first phase of this study aims at providing insights into the educators’ apprehensions, their satisfaction and usage levels of peer assessments. The second phase involves analysis of peer assessment scores of 539 students in 117 teams. Findings from statistical analysis of peer assessment scores are compared against the apprehensions of educators.

The results do not support the apprehensions among educators about peer assessments. Findings on the usage, satisfaction levels of educators and their future intentions of using peer assessments are also presented in this paper.

Studies with larger sample size, qualitative in-depth research on experiences, designs and conditions of successful peer assessments and studies based on users’ experiences of peer assessments will help in getting richer insights in this area.

Results of this study indicate a need for educators to shed their apprehensions and adopt online or offline peer assessments tools with trust and confidence.

This study is important due to the existence of contrary views, inconsistent results and lack of adequate familiarity about the use, efficacy and practice of peer assessments. Though previous studies have tried to establish the reliability of peer assessments, this study finds that educators are still apprehensive about peer assessments. This is a unique study as no previous research has attempted a comparative study to check the veracity of the apprehensions of educators about peer assessments using the actual peer assessment scores.

This chapter presents two established pedagogical techniques to increase student engagement, simulations and peer assessment. The use of each technique, its benefits and drawbacks, and how content knowledge and student engagement increase are detailed. While each of the approaches can be utilized independently to create active learning environments, this chapter illustrates the potential to extend these approaches further. An overview of an MBA-level elective on competitive analysis structured around a simulation and peer assessment is presented. The result is a highly interactive and engaging course where the simulation and peer assessments achieve symbiotic benefits. Learning and performance in the simulation is enhanced by the application of competitive analyst reports which are used by peer “clients.” Assessment in turn leads to greater insights to the simulation, and subsequently higher levels of performance on both the simulation and future analysis work. Insights on these instructional methods, their limitations, and potential barriers to adoption are offered with the hope of inspiring others to utilize and experiment with novel approaches for further enhance learner engagement.

Group‐based tasks or assignments, if well designed, can yield benefits for student employability and other important attribute developments. However there is a fundamental problem when all members of the group receive the same mark and feedback. Disregarding the quality and level of individual contributions can seriously undermine many of the educational benefits that groupwork can potentially provide. This paper aims to describe the authors' research and practical experiences of using self and peer assessment in an attempt to retain these benefits.

Both authors separately used different paper‐based methods of self and peer assessment and then used the same web‐based assessment tool. Case studies of their use of the online tool are described in Business Faculty and Design School subjects. Student comments and tabular data from their self and peer assessment ratings were compared from the two Faculties.

The value of anonymity when using the online system was found to be important for students. The automatic calculation of student ratings facilitated the self and peer assessment process for large classes in both design and business subjects. Students using the online system felt they were fairly treated in the assessment process as long as it was explained to them beforehand. Students exercised responsibility in the online ratings process by not over‐using the lowest rating category. Student comments and analysis of ratings implied that a careful and reflective evaluation of their group engagement was achieved online compared with the paper‐based examples quoted.

This was not a control group study as the subjects in business and design were different for both paper‐based and online systems. Although the online system used was the same (SPARK), the group sizes, rating scales and self and peer assessment criteria were different in the design and business cases.

The use of paper‐based approaches to calculate a fair distribution of marks to individual group members was not viable for the reasons identified. The article shows that the online system is a very viable option, particularly in large student cohorts where students are unlikely to know one another.

The purpose of this study is to explore how gender influences peer assessment in team-building activities in China.

A nine-player Werewolf game was adopted to conduct the experiment. Nine abilities were defined to evaluate players’ performances. Before the game, players filled out a self-assessment questionnaire (five-point Likert scale). After the game, players evaluated other game members’ performances using the same questionnaire. Data were analyzed using linear regression.

The results showed that gender bias clearly existed in team-building activities, with men more likely to receive better peer assessment than women. In addition, when women presented themselves as actively as men did, they received less favorable evaluations than men, whereas their failures were more likely to be exaggerated.

This study may help build harmonious teams for gender equality, and we give practical suggestions respectively from the perspective of female employees, their managers, and their companies.

Given the importance of team-building activities in teamwork, fair evaluations of team-building performances are essential. However, gender influences on peer assessment in team-building activities in China remain unclear. This study adds new and important knowledge to research on gender bias in teams.

As a way of focusing curriculum development and learning outcomes universities have introduced graduate attributes, which their students should develop during their degree course. Some of these attributes are discipline‐specific, others are generic to all professions. The development of these attributes can be promoted by the careful use of self‐ and peer assessment. The authors have previously reported using the self‐ and peer assessment software tool SPARK in various contexts to facilitate opportunities to practise, develop, assess and provide feedback on these attributes. This research and that of the other developers identified the need to extend the features of SPARK, to increase its flexibility and capacity to provide feedback. This paper seeks to report the results of the initial trials to investigate the potential of these new features to improve learning outcomes.

The paper reviews some of the key literature with regard to self‐ and peer assessment, discusses the main aspects of the original online self‐ and peer assessment tool SPARK and the new version SPARK^PLUS, reports and analyses the results of a series of student surveys to investigate whether the new features and applications of the tool have improved the learning outcomes in a large multi‐disciplinary Engineering Design subject.

It was found that using self‐ and peer assessment in conjunction with collaborative peer learning activities increased the benefits to students and improved engagement. Furthermore it was found that the new features available in SPARK^PLUS facilitated efficient implementation of additional self‐ and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes. The trials demonstrated that the tool assisted in improving students' engagement with and learning from peer learning exercises, the collection and distribution of feedback and helping them to identify their individual strengths and weaknesses.

SPARK^PLUS facilitates the efficient management of self‐ and peer assessment processes even in large classes, allowing assessments to be run multiple times a semester without an excessive burden for the coordinating academic. While SPARK^PLUS has enormous potential to provide significant benefits to both students and academics, it is necessary to caution that, although a powerful tool, its successful use requires thoughtful and reflective application combined with good assessment design.

It was found that the new features available in SPARK^PLUS efficiently facilitated the development of new self‐ and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes.