Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students

Reciprocal paired qualitative formative peer assessment of academic writing was undertaken by 12 postgraduate students of educational psychology. Overall, staff and peer assessments showed a very similar balance between positive and negative statements, but this varied according to assessment criter...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Assessment and evaluation in higher education 2000-06, Vol.25 (2), p.149-169
Main Authors: Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., Elliot, A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Academic Language
Academic writing
Cognitive Restructuring
College Students
Communication Skills
Content Area Writing
Course Objectives
Educational evaluation
Educational Psychology
English (Second Language)
Essays
Failure
Formative Evaluation
Graduate Students
Graduate studies
Group Discussion
Higher Education
Holistic Evaluation
Instructional Improvement
Peer assessment
Peer Evaluation
Peer Groups
Peer review
Pretests Posttests
Psychology
Reliability
Resistance (Psychology)
Self Esteem
Student Evaluation
Teachers
Time on Task
Validity
Verbal Communication
Writing
Writing Evaluation
Writing Skills
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Reciprocal paired qualitative formative peer assessment of academic writing was undertaken by 12 postgraduate students of educational psychology. Overall, staff and peer assessments showed a very similar balance between positive and negative statements, but this varied according to assessment criterion. However, only half of all detailed formative assessment statements made showed some degree of correspondence between staff and peers. Nevertheless, there was very little evidence of conflict between the views of staff and peers-rather, they focused on different details. Subjective feedback from students indicated that most found the process time consuming, intellectually challenging and socially uncomfortable, but effective in improving the quality of their own subsequent written work and developing other transferable skills. The reliability and validity of this type of peer assessment thus appeared adequate, and the partiality of overlap in detail between staff and peer assessments suggested that the triangulation peer assessment offers is likely to add value. However, caution is indicated regarding the generalisation of this finding. Implications for action are outlined.
ISSN:0260-2938
1469-297X
DOI:10.1080/713611428