PEER AND TEACHER ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC ESSAY WRITING: PROCEDURE AND CORRESPONDENCE

Jelena Anđelković

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2201171A
First page
171
Last page
184

Abstract


This paper reports on the assessment procedure of students’ academic essays at an undergraduate course in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) at a business-oriented university during the school year 2020/21. Following the social constructivism paradigm (e.g. Vygotsky, 1962), the procedure employed peer assessment (PA) and teacher assessment (TA) of students’ academic essays and was aimed at improving their essay writing performance. The paper further reports on the degree of correspondence between the grades awarded by teachers and peer assessors on a set of assessment criteria to investigate the potential of PA as a (a) learning tool and as a (b) supplementary assessment tool. Lower correlation and higher difference between mean grades awarded by teachers and peers on some of the assessment criteria may indicate the essay writing aspects students are weakest at. The results also implicate that certain adjustments in the assessment procedure need to be made in future iterations of the course, particularly with regard to assessment training, defining assessment criteria, and pairing multiple peer raters with a single teacher rater, as these changes may not only improve the benefits PA can bring, but also contribute to its validity.  


Keywords

peer assessment, teacher assessment, academic essay, English for academic purposes

Full Text:

PDF

References


Birenbaum, M. 2003. "New insights into learning and teaching and their implications for assessment." In Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards, pp. 13-36. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48125-1_2

Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Wilson, R. W. 2006. Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891

Chang, C. C., Tseng, K. H., Chou, P. N., & Chen, Y. H. 2011. Reliability and validity of Web-based portfolio peer assessment: A case study for a senior high school’s students taking computer course. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1306-1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.014

Cheng, W., & Warren, M. 1999. Making a difference: Using peers to assess individual students' contributions to a group project. Teaching in higher education, 5(2), 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/135625100114885

Conway, R., Kember, D., Sivan, A., & Wu, M. 1993. Peer assessment of an individual‘s contribution to a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293930180104

Cooper, P. A. 1993. Paradigm shifts in designed instruction: From behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism. Educational technology, 33(5), 12-19.

Ernest, P. 1999. Social constructivism as a philosophy of mathematics: Radical constructivism rehabilitated? Retrieved from https://systemika.g-i.cz/record/1595/files/Ernest,%20Paul%20-%20Social%20Constructivism%20as%20Philosophy%20of%20Mathematics.pdf

Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. 1989. Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 59(4), 395-430. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059004395

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. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070003287

Falchikov, N. 2007. The place of peers in learning and assessment. In: Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (Eds.). Rethinking assessment in higher education (pp. 138-153). Routledge.

Graner, M. H. 1985. Revision techniques: Peer editing and the revision workshop. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 109.

Havnes, A., & McDowell, L. (Eds.). 2008. Balancing dilemmas in assessment and learning in contemporary education. Routledge.

Hein, G. E. 1991, October. Constructivist learning theory. Paper presented at the CECA (International Committee of Museum Educators) Conference, Jerusalem, Israel.

Hoover, W. A. 1996. The practice implications of constructivism. SEDL Letter, 9(3), 1-2.

Kiraly, D. 2005. Project-based learning: A case for situated translation. Meta: Journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal, 50(4), 1098-1111. https://doi.org/10.7202/012063ar

Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. 2011. Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387-406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6

Meršnik, M., Anđelković, J. 2020. Teaching academic writing at a business-oriented university. Conference Proceedings of the IV International Conference: From Theory to Practice in Language for Specific Purposes, pp. 158-173, ISSN: 1849-9279

Oldfield, K. A., & Macalpine, J. M. K. 1995. Peer and Self‐assessment at Tertiary Level‐‐an experiential report. Assessment in Higher Education, 20(1), 125-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293950200113

Mowl, G., & Pain, R. 1995. Using self and peer assessment to improve students’ essay writing: A case study from geography. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(4), 324-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/1355800950320404

Prawat, R. S., & Floden, R. E. 1994. Philosophical perspectives on constructivist views of learning. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2901_4

Schunn, C., Godley, A., DeMartino, S. 2016. The Reliability and Validity of Peer Review of Writing in High School AP English Classes. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(1), 13–23. doi:10.1002/jaal.525

Sivan, A. 2010. Implementing peer assessment to improve teaching and learning. Hong Kong Baptist University.

Spiller, D. 2012. Assessment matters: Self-assessment and peer assessment. The University of Waikato, 13.

Sluijsmans, D. M., Moerkerke, G., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Dochy, F. J. 2001. Peer assessment in problem based learning. Studies in educational evaluation, 27(2), 153-173.

Topping, K. 2003. Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reliability, validity and utility. In Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 55-87).

Springer, Dordrecht. DOI: 10.1007/0-306-48125-1_4

Topping, K. J. 2009. Peer assessment. Theory into practice, 48(1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569

Twomey Fosnot, C. 1989. Enquiring teachers, enquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching. Teachers College Press.Retrieved from http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning.html

Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. 2010. Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and instruction, 20(4), 270-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004

Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society. Harvard University Press.

Zhang, F., Schunn, C., Li, W., & Long, M. 2020. Changes in the reliability and validity of peer assessment across the college years. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 45(8), 1073-1087. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1724260




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2201171A

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)
ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)