1 / 11

Using Peer Marking in Group Projects in the Creative Arts

Using Peer Marking in Group Projects in the Creative Arts. Ian Willcock School of Creative Arts. Group Working – why?. Valuable learning resource Employ important vocational and life skills Part of the Learning Outcomes for many programmes Motivate students

christophernelson
Download Presentation

Using Peer Marking in Group Projects in the Creative Arts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Using Peer Marking in Group Projects in the Creative Arts Ian Willcock School of Creative Arts

  2. Group Working – why? • Valuable learning resource • Employ important vocational and life skills • Part of the Learning Outcomes for many programmes • Motivate students • Improve retention and participation • Enable substantial outcomes (Gibbs 2009)

  3. Evaluative criteria for group assessment methods • Maximise learning • Academic rigour • Students’ perception of fairness • Auditable and transparent • Consistent with other assessment practice • Efficiency of administration • Lecturer workload

  4. Group Assessment – common strategies • Same mark for all members from Lecturer based on group outcome. • Individual marks based on lecturer’s observation or students’ reflective accounts. • Group mark (from lecturer) shared out between members (e.g. Clelford 2004). • Peer marking • Hybrid approaches

  5. A Hybrid strategy - • An assessment model using 2 contributing elements; product (60%) and process (40%). • Lecturer marks group outcomes. • Students confidentially grade all group members’ contributions using simple, explicit criteria supplied by Lecturer • A spreadsheet calculates individual grades • Also allows lecturer to monitor and moderate peer assessment processes.

  6. Peer evaluation - grading • Simple numerical system: -

  7. Peer evaluation - criteria • Reference relevant SEEC level descriptors • Level 4: • Level 5:

  8. Calculation spreadsheet Students’ names Entered by Lecturer Marks in each category Entered by Lecturer Results - for each component and total Moderation summary

  9. Assignment timeline • Groups formed, assignment set. • Groups carry out project. • Groups submit group outcome, individuals submit confidential peer assessment for each group member. • Lecturer evaluates group outcomes. • Lecturer configures spreadsheet and enters peer marks and any submission problems. • Lecturer moderates peer assessment and copies individual grade calculations to feedback sheets.

  10. Evaluation • Quick and robust in use • Easy to administer • Students like the system and feel it is fair. • Motivates both strong and weak students. • Encourages students to reflect on different aspects of group working. • Confidential peer marking encourages honesty and supports individuals regardless of background and personality.

  11. References Clelford, T. (2004) Sizing the Slice : Assessing Individual Performance in Group Projects. The Higher Education Academy, UK. [Available online: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/resource_database/casestudies/cs_096] last access 4/5/10. Gibbs, G. (2009) The Assessment of Group Work: Lessons from the Literature. Oxford Brooks University. [Available online: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/documents/Brookes%20groupwork%20Gibbs%20Dec%2009.pdf] last accessed 4/5/10.

More Related