Using PeerMark - guidance for staff
Contents
| Table of Contents | ||
|---|---|---|
|
...
- Staff set up a Turnitin assignment to which students submit their work.
- Staff set up an associated PeerMark, including review questions, setting how many pieces of work each students review, by when, how allocated, whether anonymous &c.
- Students submit their work to the Turnitin assignment.
- Students review others' work.
- Students receive the feedback given by their peers, along with a mark for their own review(s).
- [[CHECK]] Depending on the timing, students can then incorporate this feedback into a final submission
What might PeerMark help with?
...
| Info |
|---|
| Edinburgh University has made a number of PeerMark case studies available, including the experiences and thinking of staff setting up peer assessment for the first time. Nb you may need to allow the media in your web browser security settings. For general peer assessment design principles and case studies of peer assessment / peer review, see the University of Strathclyde's PEER Toolkit and the contributions Eva Sorensen (Chemical Engineering) and Richard Milne (Virology) on UCL's Teaching & Learning Portal. |
What might PeerMark help with?
- Students' ability to understand and work with assessment criteria.
- Students' participation in the authentic academic practice of peer review.
- The possibility of feedback that is quicker, more individualised, and more plentiful than tutors are able to provide.
- Triangulation - peer review and tutor assessment (not to mention self assessment) triangulate each other, giving students perspective on their work and (if they are permitted to see how other students reviewed the same work they reviewed) on the criteria.
- Relatedly, insights into subjectivity and governance in the assessment process.
- Provision of feedback on students' draft work - given sufficient time for amendments before the deadline. (Worried students might take each others' ideas? See below.)
In the light of his research into peer assessment, Keith Topping (2009) suggests explaining to students,
"...that peer assessment involves students directly in learning, and should promote a sense of ownership, personal responsibility, and motivation. Teachers can also point out that peer assessment can increase variety and interest, activity and interactivity, identification and bonding, self-confidence, and empathy with others."
| Info |
|---|
Considerations Can students at any level of knowledge carry out good peer reviews? In their meta-analysis comparing validity of tutor and student assessments, Falchikov and Goldfinch (2009) could not find evidence that peer assessment in higher level courses was any more valid than at introductory levels. They speculate that careful preparation by tutors and students can compensate for subject knowledge of students at the early stages of their course. |
Setting up a new PeerMark Assignment
...
In the 'Peermark Assignment' tab of the PeerMark Manager you enter basic information about the activity. Title This will appear for students and should be distinctive and descriptive. Point value (required)This is the The marks available for the peer review itself - i.e. not for the reviewed work. Instructions to students Brief guidance about what students should do and why. Start date, Due date, Post date NB How do these relate to the Turnitin assignment's dates? Make sure you click the 'Save & Continue' button to proceed to the next tab.
|
| ||
|
|
Adding Questions
The 'PeerMark Questions' tab of the PeerMark Manager allows you create the questions you want the peer reviewers to answer. To add a question, click 'Add question' |
|
Enter your question text, the question type. There are two types of question you can use; |
|
For a 'Free response' question, enter the minimum answer length (this counts words). |
|
For a 'Scale' question, enter the scale size and the lowest and highest values |
|
You can also use libraries to manage your Peermark questions. Clicking on Library Settings allows you to create and delete libraries, and to save and retrieve questions from those libraries. There is also a 'Sample Library' which you can add pre-made questions from. |
|
Considerations
|
|
Distribution
| Note |
|---|
Please note that after reviewing has started you won't be able to pair students - so do make any allocations in advance. |
In the 'Distribution' tab of the PeerMark Manager you can see all the student accounts associated with this assignment and how they will be allocated reviews. If you want to, this is where you can get involved with who reviews whose work. If you can't see all the accounts you are expecting, click outside of the Peermark Manager to return to your Turnitin assignment page; then click its 'Turnitin Students' tab. From there you can click 'Enrol all students', which will bring in all students 'enrolled' in that Moodle course area. |
| |||
If you need to exempt student from the PeerMark activity, you can exclude them by clicking their adjacent red Minus icon; their name displays greyed-out and they gain a green Plus icon, which you can click if you need to reinstate them. If you want to pair students (so that a particular student is allocated the work of another particular student to review, overriding any other distribution settings) you can do so by clicking the blue Plus icon and then selecting a student to pair with from the dropdown list. Paired students are then required to review the work they are allocated.
|
| |||
|
|
Additional Settings
On the 'Peermark Assignment' tab there is a link for additional settings. Here's some explanation of the less obvious ones. 'Award full points if review is written' If ticked this means tutors will not be able to mark the reviews and a student will need to meet set requirements for every part of the review in order to get the available marks, on an all-or-nothing basis. If unticked, tutors can assign and differentiate marks for each student's review. 'Allow students to view author and reviewer names' If left unticked, you probably need to remind students not to put any identifying information in the title, filename, or body of their work. 'Paper(s) automatically distributed by Peermark' This sets the number of randomly allocated papers each student has to review. 'Papers(s) selected by the student' This sets the number of papers a student can choose to review. Students can review a combination of allocated and selected papers. 'Require self-review' If checked, a student has to review their own paper. It isn't currently possible to select self review only - the number allocated by PeerMark has to be at least one. |
|
|
|
...
Sometimes, when switching between tabs, you will see an 'Error, you are not authorised to access this resource' message. Click away from the window and reopen it vis the Peermark manage icon. |
|
|
|
References
- Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322. doi:10.3102/00346543070003287
- McConlogue, T. (2012). But is it fair? Developing students’ understanding of grading complex written work through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 113–123. doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.515010
- Nicol, D., (2007). Peer Evaluation in Assessment Review project. Available from http://www.reap.ac.uk/PEER.aspx
- Sorensen, E., (2013). Experiences of using peer assessment in a 4th year design module. Available from: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/case-studies-news/assessment-feedback/peer-assessment-chemical-engineering
- Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20–27. doi:10.1080/00405840802577569