1 Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan “Super U” Peer-Assessment: No marks required, just feedback? Evaluating the Quality of Computerized.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Peer-Assessment. students comment on and judge their colleagues work.
Advertisements

Internationalising Language Teaching and Learning with the help of the Erasmus Community to Increase Employability - Results of a Pilot Study. Newcastle.
Assessment Photo Album Science Fair Project
The Benefits from Allowing Plagiarism Workshop Facilitator Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan.
Presenter: Han, Yi-Ti Adviser: Chen, Ming-Puu Date: Jan 19, 2009 Sitthiworachart, J. & Joy, M.(2008). Computer support of effective peer assessment in.
EVALUATING WRITING What, Why, and How? Workshopping explanation and guidelines Rubrics: for students and instructors Students Responding to Instructor.
The way forward? Sandy George and Pete Hanratty ELTS, Swansea University.
Assessment and error correction. Reasons for assessment  a teacher is accountable for children’s progress to the children themselves, to the parents,
Consistency of Assessment
Peer and Self – Assessment using Computer Assisted Self & Peer Assessment Ratings (CASPAR) Dr Holly Henderson.
Improving Students’ understanding of Feedback
EDP 303 Portfolio Jill Ann Broermann Spring 2004.
Perceptions of the Role of Feedback in Supporting 1 st Yr Learning Jon Scott, Ruth Bevan, Jo Badge & Alan Cann School of Biological Sciences.
CAA MUST be more than multiple-choice tests for it to be academically credible? Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan.
Peer & Self Assessment Strategies and Pitfalls. Benefits of Peer & Self Assessment Peer Assessment Learners provide each other with lots of additional.
Using Animals for Research. Level 5: Identify ethical and moral issues linked to animal research. Level 6. Describe how particular animal research has.
Using Turnitin K. Robins and K. McCourt. Aims of Session To be aware of the benefits of using Turnitin for formative feedback; To be able to set up Turnitin.
Academic Writing By Paul Stone FWU AEP. General Points Students will produce academic essays on topics of their choosing Writing should be meaningful.
Assessment for Learning
ULTSEC Innovation Fund Ruth Valentine School of Dental Sciences Simon Cotterill Learning and Teaching Support Unit, Faculty of Medical Sciences.
Invisible writing Invisible Writing The link between stupidity and the semicolon Dr Pat Hill, FHEA Academic Skills Tutor /Senior Lecturer School of Music,
Module 3: Unit 2, Session 3 MODULE 3: ASSESSMENT Adolescent Literacy – Professional Development Unit 2, Session 3.
The Learning and Teaching Conference nd April 2015.
Heriot-Watt University The Use of Computerized Peer-Assessment Dr Phil Davies Division of Computing & Mathematical Sciences Department of Computing FAT.
Digital Assessment Training Trainer: Name
E- ASSESSMENT Why use it.. whatever it is? Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan.
etools.massey.ac.nz Tools to help lecturers mark assignments John Milne Eva Heinrich.
Approaching Failure. Why? “We stigmatise mistakes, we are running an education system where mistakes are seen as the worst thing you can make. Most kids.
CISB594 – Business Intelligence Introduction. What will we look at today Lecturer Learning Outcomes Course Structure Materials Reference Texts Assessments.
Exhibition on Testing and Measurement: Measurement Experts’ Reactions Thanos Patelis The College Board 1 Symposium at the Annual Meeting of NCME Denver,
Directorate of Human Resources The use of the Nominal Group Technique in evaluating student experience Diana Williams OCSLD.
A review of peer assessment tools. The benefits of peer assessment Peer assessment is a powerful teaching technique that provides benefits to learners,
Reports 2015! Our new reports are intended to inform you about how your child is performing against age- related expectations linked with the new national.
Plagiarism Whose fault is it? Phil Davies FAT. Plagiarism in Education Plagiarism in education is not a student problem, it is one that is created by.
Student feedback – consolidating the community of practice using the Google Blogger Peter Chalk Faculty of Computing.
©Dr I M Bradley Doing the project and other things.
Types Of Memory. A REVIEW Memory is the system or process by which the products or results of learning are stored for future use (recall) What is something.
Computerised Peer-Assessment that supports the rewarding of evaluative skills in Essay Writing (C.A.P.) & Programming (Coursemarker) Phil Davies & Stuart.
Peer-Review/Assessment Aid to Learning & Assessment Phil Davies Division of Computing & Mathematical Sciences Department of Computing FAT University of.
ELPP, 15 November 2010 e-Feedback Meeting Students’ Needs & Expectations Yuhua Hu & Paul McLaughlin The School of Biological Sciences.
The Quality of Peer-Feedback in the Computerised Peer-Assessment of Essays? The case for awarding ‘marks for marking’ based upon peer feedback not marks.
How does the definition match your thoughts? How does the definition differ from your thoughts? Assessment Definition Assessment is the ongoing process.
Understanding Rubrics What is a rubric? A scoring tool that lists the criteria for a piece of work, or “what counts” (e.g., purpose, organization, detail,
G040 – Lecture 06 Comparing Documents Report Mr C Johnston ICT Teacher
Review in Computerized Peer- Assessment Dr Phil Davies Department of Computing Division of Computing & Mathematical Sciences FAT University of Glamorgan.
Heriot Watt University Breakout Session MCQ with Confidence Dr Phil Davies Division of Computing & Mathematical Sciences Department of Computing FAT University.
The Continual Assessment of Confidence or Knowledge with Hidden MCQ? Short Paper W.I.P. Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan.
C+ Pass/Fail A A- 85% F S Unsatisfactory 67% D C B 93%
ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING. -actively involved in their own learning; -able to judge the success of their work and set and understand targets for improvement;
Feedback in University Teaching Prof. Arif Khurshed Division of Accounting and Finance.
“The End Justifies the Means” When and how to use Computerised Assessment to Promote Learning Phil Davies School of Computing.
Chapter 14: Affective Assessment
Computerised Peer-Assessment Phil Davies University of Glamorgan South Wales Lecturer getting out of doing marking.
Computerised self/peer support, learning and assessment of final year undergraduates? Phil Davies University of Glamorgan.
1 Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan “Super U” The Automatic Generation of ‘Marks for Marking’ within the Computerised Peer-Assessment.
Carol Dweck (Stanford University) Adapted from How do people’s beliefs influence their motivation and subsequent achievement in academic.
E-Assessment: Removing the Boundaries of C.A.A. Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan South Wales UK.
Peer Assessments Using iPeer Dr. Carolyn Awalt Vinayak Melarkod Instructional Support Services UTEP 10/19/2009.
Dr Deirdre Burke: National Teacher Fellowship project Copies of all materials can be found in
 Spring 2014 MCED 3430 Kelly Chaney.  Shared Group Grade o The group submits one product and all group members receive the same grade, regardless of.
Assessment & Feedback Working Group Developing Departmental Assessment & Feedback Practices The ‘Quick Wins’ Paper.
Questioning: Foundation for an Effective Champion …
An Introduction to e-Assessment
Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan “Super U”
CUTM 4012: Methods of Teaching English
Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan “Super U”
Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan
Jill Ann Broermann Spring 2004
A Moodle-based Peer Assessment Tool
Presentation transcript:

1 Phil Davies School of Computing University of Glamorgan “Super U” Peer-Assessment: No marks required, just feedback? Evaluating the Quality of Computerized Peer-Feedback compared with Computerized Peer-Marking

2 Definition of Peer-Assessment?  In describing the teacher.. A tall b******, so he was. A tall thin, mean b******, with a baldy head like a lightbulb. He’d make us mark each other’s work, then for every wrong mark we got, we’d get a thump. That way – he paused – ‘we were implicated in each other’s pain’ McCarthy’s Bar McCarthy’s Bar (Pete McCarthy, 2000,page 68)

3 Why Peer-Assessment  Community of Practice!!  Working together to learn (and be assessed)  Perceptions –Staff > Lecturer getting easy life not marking –Student> Lecturer getting easy life not marking  Student Awareness of Benefits …. IMPORTANT TANGIBILITY  Success dependant upon scalability (computerisation).. “Student Numbers have risen dramatically since 1991 without a concomitant increase in resources” (Pond et al, 1995)

4 Computerised Peer-Assessment  CAP System  Permits students to mark & comment the work of other students. (normally 8)  Also initial self-assess stage (reflection) … used as a standard of expectation  Internet, not Web-based system (developed in Visual Basic / Access)

5

6 Having done the marking, what next?  Students should receive feedback  What feedback? –Marks –Comments  Which is most important? –To students or staff

7

8 AUTOMATICALLY THE MARKER.. ANONYMOUS

9 What should the marker do? Reflect  Look at essay again  Take into account the essay owner’s comments  Further clarification (if it is needed, then is this a ‘black mark’ against the marker?)  Try to ‘appease’ the essay owner?  Modify mark based upon reflection?  Give more feedback

10

11 Must be rewarded for doing the ‘mark for marking’ process.. Based on quality  How to judge?  Standard of expectation (self-assessment)  Marking consistency  Commenting, quality, measure against mark  Discussion Element  Need for additional comments – black mark?  Reaction to requests / further clarification

12 Standard of Expectation Self-Assess = 52% Peer-Assessed as = 58% ESSAY Compensated Median Mark Student Mark Difference(absolute) W65%57% -8% (2) X48%36% -12% (6) Y53%49% -4% (2) Z61%59% -2% (4) -6.5% (3.5)

13

14 How easy to get mark for marking?  Statistically fairly easy to create a mark for marking based upon marks  Take into account high and low markers  Standard of expectation  Consistency … judge against final mark awarded for an essay (compensated median)  What about the comments?

15 Feedback Index  Produce an index that reflects the quality of commenting  Produce an average feedback index for an essay  Compare against marker in a similar manner to marks analysis  Where does this feedback index come from and is it valid?

16 The way to get the feedback index?  Develop an application?? –C-Rater?  Spelling Mistakes  Similar Meanings? –That was cool –Really Choc –Really Good Essay  Manually

17

18 Commonality!!  In the 67 essays that were marked –Only 96 comments –44% positive and 56% negative –Highly critical if something not explained properly (21% of total comments (of which 73% were negative)  Better students were more critical than weaker students.. –Better understanding permitting criticism? –Confidence? –Hostility?  Comments grouped into 10 categories  Need to QUANTIFY these comments.. Feedback index  Create a database holding positive & negative (by category)

19

20

21

22

23

24

25 Time Consuming?  Can we formulate the marking process  Take away need for quantification process of analyzing comments  Is it still peer-assessment if the students are told what to say?

26

27 STUDENT FRED REFERENCES: Positive ……… Negative ……. Personal Valuation 5, 3, 2, 1 3, 1, 2

28 Some points outstanding  What should students do if they identify plagiarism?  Is it ethical to get students to mark the work of their peers?  Is a computerised solution valid for all?  At what age / level can we trust the use of peer assessment?  How do we assess the time required to perform the marking task?

29 Peer-Assessment: No marks required, just feedback?  Not there yet  Feedback index results are very positive  Require more evaluation before totally automated system is possible  Getting there.. Removing subjectivity in marking