Loading…

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:
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!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3
container_end_page 169
container_issue 2
container_start_page 149
container_title Assessment and evaluation in higher education
container_volume 25
creator Topping, K. J.
Smith, E. F.
Swanson, I.
Elliot, A.
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/713611428
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_713611428</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ611440</ericid><sourcerecordid>55159606</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkDtPAzEQhC0EEiFQ0FNYdBRH_LpXGaKEVyQiAYLu5NjryFHuLtg-Qv49Fx0KBQXVrjTfzK4GoXNKrinJyCClPKFUsOwA9ahI8ojl6fsh6hGWkHbn2TE68X5JCBGcxj30OKldKYP9BDwDcHjoPXhfQhVwbfBQSQ2lVfjN2WCrBb6BsAGo8Kz2YeGkbmQA_Bwa3Rr8KToycuXh7Gf20etk_DK6i6ZPt_ej4TRSLI1DpOdJwmLKwRghBBc0Z5QIA0wrEWeMJ5DHTLDUzEmuZZbFaZbKuVRU5rE0oHkfXXa5a1d_NOBDsawbV7UnC0Z4RggltIWuOki52nsHplg7W0q3LSgpdlUV-6pa9qJjwVm158YPO1mQVh50sq3Mrq1N7Va6CHK7qp1xslLW_4YV4Su0DvGvg__94xv3GYWj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>203800101</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students</title><source>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>ProQuest One Literature</source><source>ERIC</source><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Topping, K. J. ; Smith, E. F. ; Swanson, I. ; Elliot, A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Topping, K. J. ; Smith, E. F. ; Swanson, I. ; Elliot, A.</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0260-2938</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-297X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/713611428</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AEHEED</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Taylor &amp; Francis Group</publisher><subject>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</subject><ispartof>Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 2000-06, Vol.25 (2), p.149-169</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2000</rights><rights>Copyright Carfax Publishing Company Jun 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/203800101/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/203800101?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21378,21394,27924,27925,33611,33877,43733,43880,62661,62662,62677,74196,74221,74397</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ611440$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Topping, K. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, E. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swanson, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elliot, A.</creatorcontrib><title>Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students</title><title>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</title><description>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.</description><subject>Academic Language</subject><subject>Academic writing</subject><subject>Cognitive Restructuring</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Communication Skills</subject><subject>Content Area Writing</subject><subject>Course Objectives</subject><subject>Educational evaluation</subject><subject>Educational Psychology</subject><subject>English (Second Language)</subject><subject>Essays</subject><subject>Failure</subject><subject>Formative Evaluation</subject><subject>Graduate Students</subject><subject>Graduate studies</subject><subject>Group Discussion</subject><subject>Higher Education</subject><subject>Holistic Evaluation</subject><subject>Instructional Improvement</subject><subject>Peer assessment</subject><subject>Peer Evaluation</subject><subject>Peer Groups</subject><subject>Peer review</subject><subject>Pretests Posttests</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Resistance (Psychology)</subject><subject>Self Esteem</subject><subject>Student Evaluation</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Time on Task</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Verbal Communication</subject><subject>Writing</subject><subject>Writing Evaluation</subject><subject>Writing Skills</subject><issn>0260-2938</issn><issn>1469-297X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkDtPAzEQhC0EEiFQ0FNYdBRH_LpXGaKEVyQiAYLu5NjryFHuLtg-Qv49Fx0KBQXVrjTfzK4GoXNKrinJyCClPKFUsOwA9ahI8ojl6fsh6hGWkHbn2TE68X5JCBGcxj30OKldKYP9BDwDcHjoPXhfQhVwbfBQSQ2lVfjN2WCrBb6BsAGo8Kz2YeGkbmQA_Bwa3Rr8KToycuXh7Gf20etk_DK6i6ZPt_ej4TRSLI1DpOdJwmLKwRghBBc0Z5QIA0wrEWeMJ5DHTLDUzEmuZZbFaZbKuVRU5rE0oHkfXXa5a1d_NOBDsawbV7UnC0Z4RggltIWuOki52nsHplg7W0q3LSgpdlUV-6pa9qJjwVm158YPO1mQVh50sq3Mrq1N7Va6CHK7qp1xslLW_4YV4Su0DvGvg__94xv3GYWj</recordid><startdate>20000601</startdate><enddate>20000601</enddate><creator>Topping, K. J.</creator><creator>Smith, E. F.</creator><creator>Swanson, I.</creator><creator>Elliot, A.</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000601</creationdate><title>Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students</title><author>Topping, K. J. ; Smith, E. F. ; Swanson, I. ; Elliot, A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Academic Language</topic><topic>Academic writing</topic><topic>Cognitive Restructuring</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Communication Skills</topic><topic>Content Area Writing</topic><topic>Course Objectives</topic><topic>Educational evaluation</topic><topic>Educational Psychology</topic><topic>English (Second Language)</topic><topic>Essays</topic><topic>Failure</topic><topic>Formative Evaluation</topic><topic>Graduate Students</topic><topic>Graduate studies</topic><topic>Group Discussion</topic><topic>Higher Education</topic><topic>Holistic Evaluation</topic><topic>Instructional Improvement</topic><topic>Peer assessment</topic><topic>Peer Evaluation</topic><topic>Peer Groups</topic><topic>Peer review</topic><topic>Pretests Posttests</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Resistance (Psychology)</topic><topic>Self Esteem</topic><topic>Student Evaluation</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Time on Task</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Verbal Communication</topic><topic>Writing</topic><topic>Writing Evaluation</topic><topic>Writing Skills</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Topping, K. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, E. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swanson, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elliot, A.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Topping, K. J.</au><au>Smith, E. F.</au><au>Swanson, I.</au><au>Elliot, A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ611440</ericid><atitle>Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students</atitle><jtitle>Assessment and evaluation in higher education</jtitle><date>2000-06-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>149</spage><epage>169</epage><pages>149-169</pages><issn>0260-2938</issn><eissn>1469-297X</eissn><coden>AEHEED</coden><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/713611428</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0260-2938
ispartof Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 2000-06, Vol.25 (2), p.149-169
issn 0260-2938
1469-297X
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_713611428
source Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); ProQuest One Literature; ERIC; Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection
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
title Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T22%3A16%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Formative%20Peer%20Assessment%20of%20Academic%20Writing%20Between%20Postgraduate%20Students&rft.jtitle=Assessment%20and%20evaluation%20in%20higher%20education&rft.au=Topping,%20K.%20J.&rft.date=2000-06-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=149&rft.epage=169&rft.pages=149-169&rft.issn=0260-2938&rft.eissn=1469-297X&rft.coden=AEHEED&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/713611428&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E55159606%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-db662513eff44434192104fe2dc458236e952427fb09da885787abac1a95afed3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=203800101&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ611440&rfr_iscdi=true