John LockeySchool of Mechanical and Systems EngineeringNewcastle University

Innovation Fund 2013 Self and Peer AssessmentInterim Report

Students Perception of Peer Assessment

Proposal

A Cross Cultural Study

Collaboration with other Schools

£3,740 Funding Support

Students Perception of Peer Assessment

Modules used for Focus Groups

On Line Questionnaires have been developed and sent to students for feedback.

Focus groups have taken place for last years stage three students.

Surveys and group meetings to take place after Christmas.

Focus Group Meetings

Companies you worked with?

At the End of Semester 1 did you understand the aim and process of Peer Assessment?

How would you rate yourself and the members of your group today? Similarly or Differently if Differently Why?

Did you understand how P.A. may affect your overall grade?

Do you think the process is Fair/Unfair? (If unfair explain why)

What can we do to improve the Peer Assessment?

Results of Interim Survey (Part)

The majority of students in Singapore (52%) were unsatisfied with their final grade as compared to the students in the UK (70%) who were generally satisfied with their result

The majority of students from both countries agreed that the peer assessment was fair

The majority of students from both countries to agree to leave their ratings of each other’s contributions unchanged, if given the option to reassess.

The majority of students in Singapore (92%) believe that PA can be improved whereas in the UK, majority of the students believe that the PA cannot be improved any further (93%)

Peer Assessment Form

Assessed StudentNames

Contribution to group

Was he/she regularly at the group meetings and available for discussion, planning and actions?

Did he/she contribute to the needs of the group? e.g. produce ideas, listen to others, provide leadership or direction, help the group function well as a team.

Did he/she do what was agreed to be done at the meetings?

Did he/she take a fair share of the work?

Overall Rating

Peer Assessment Grading

A for an outstanding contribution - this should be used rarely

B for a leading contribution C for a significant contribution - this is the expected

average level of contribution D for a below average contribution E being for a very limited contribution N being for NO contribution - this should be used

only in exceptional circumstances

 

Questions?