Student Peer Assessment Using Adaptive Comparative Judgment: Grading Accuracy versus Quality of Feedback.
Year: 2019
Type: article
Abstract: In this study we explored the potential of adaptive comparative judgement (ACJ) as a medium for peer assessment and for the giving and receiving of peer feedback. ACJ is a marking protocol in which the assessor (or judge) merely compares two answers and chooses a winner. Repeated judgements and a suitable sorting algorithm allow marks to be derived from a rank order of scripts. Feedback can be added to each script. In this case study (a 500 word report in year 3 of a pharmacy programme) each student gave feedback to 10 others and the overall feedback standard was high, but, as judges, students were inconsistent with one another and with staff assessment. This contrasts with a previous exercise, in which a robust assessment was achieved but feedback was less good. A hierarchical marking scheme and explicit feedback guidelines may be key to optimising ACJ-based student peer assessment.
Authors: Constantinos Demonacos, Steven R. Ellis, Jill Barber
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2953342260