An evaluation of peer-to-peer feedback using adaptive comparative judgement
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
Adaptive Comparative Judgement is an alternative to conventional marking in which the assessor (or judge) merely compares two answers and chooses a winner. Repeated judgements and the use of a suitable sorting algorithm allow marked to be derived from a rank order of scripts. Feedback can be added to each script as it is judged.
We have evaluated the use of adaptive comparative judgement for peer assessment and feedback using a case study in the third year of a Pharmacy programme. The exercise consisted of five parts each of 100 words.
Each student conducted 10 judgements and left feedback, which was of overall very high quality. The assessment, however, was less successful. Students’ judgements were not very consistent with one another, nor with staff assessment. This contrasts with a previous exercise, in which the student assessment was of high reliability but the feedback was less good.
This exercise was successful in promoting mutual support among students through the giving and receiving of feedback. We conclude, however, that for optimum use of adaptive comparative judgement for peer assessment, a hierarchical marking scheme is required, but students should be encouraged to give feedback on all aspects of the assessment.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Proposed Policy for Journals That Offer Delayed Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work for one year after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).