Concepedia

TLDR

Student assessment procedures must be valid, reliable, practicable, fair, and useful, yet the prevailing authoritarian model in higher education has disadvantages that prior studies of self‑assessment have begun to expose. The study aims to evaluate self‑ and peer‑group assessment against traditional methods, examining over‑/under‑marking, grading accuracy relative to age or ability, and impacts on learning and personal development, while outlining future research directions. The authors implemented a self‑ and peer‑group assessment scheme designed to satisfy Percival and Ellington's criteria, recording its implementation details and presenting the resulting data. The scheme proved successful in aligning self‑ and peer‑group assessments with tutor grades and in positively evaluating students' perceptions of its effects.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Any student assessment procedure should meet a number of criteria. It should be -valid, reliable, practicable and fair, and useful to students. (1) The prevailing authoritarian model of assessment in higher education is examined and its disadvantages elaborated. Results of some previous studies of self assessment are discussed. The present study attempts to meet Percival and Ellington's criteria, and addresses itself to a number of important questions concerning the comparability of self and peer group assessment with traditional methods; the extent of over‐ or undermarking by students, the relationships between accuracy of grading and age or overall ability, and the possible effects on learning or personal development of self and peer group assessment procedures. Details of the implementation of the scheme are recorded, and results presented and discussed. In terms of both product (the correspondences between self or peer and tutor assessment) and process (the evaluation by students of the effects of the scheme), the scheme appears to be successful. Implications and plans for future studies are elaborated.

References

YearCitations

Page 1