An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assessment,peer feedback,peer review,peer evaluation and peer grading

Abstract

Peer assessment has proven to have positive learning outcomes. Importantly, peer assessment is a social process and some claim that the use of anonymity might have advantages. However, the findings have not always been in the same direction. Our aims were: (a) to review the effects of using anonymity in peer assessment on performance, peer feedback content, peer grading accuracy, social effects and students’ perspective on peer assessment; and (b) to investigate the effects of four moderating variables (educational level, peer grading, assessment aids, direction of anonymity) in relation to anonymity. A literature search was conducted including five different terms related to peer assessment (e.g., peer feedback) and anonymity. Fourteen studies that used a control group or a within group design were found. The narrative review revealed that anonymous peer assessment seems to provide advantages for students’ perceptions about the learning value of peer assessment, delivering more critical peer feedback, increased self-perceived social effects, a slight tendency for more performance, especially in higher education and with less peer assessment aids. Some conclusions are that: (a) when implementing anonymity in peer assessment the instructional context and goals need to be considered, (b) existent empirical research is still limited, and (c) future research should employ stronger and more complex research designs.     

A mixed methods approach to the assessor's targeting behavior during online peer assessment: effects of anonymity and underlying reasons

This study examined the effects of identity revelation and concealment on the number of times students' work was assessed in an online peer assessment context. It also examined the underlying reasons guiding the assessor's targeting behavior. Two fifth-grade classes participated. The one-group pretest–posttest experimental research design coupled with qualitative research method was adopted. The results from social network analysis (SNA) showed a high redundancy rate for both high- and low-targeted assessees in identity-revealed and identity-concealed conditions for both classes. Moreover, the density metrics indicated that all sociograms were similarly sparse. The Wilcoxon tests further confirmed that there were no significant differences in the assessees' ranking in the two conditions for both classes. Finally, analysis of students' self-reflective data revealed that the features/content of the work to be assessed, rather than who the question-author was, was the determining factor when it came to deciding the target for online peer assessment.     

The assessment cycle: a model for learning through peer assessment

This paper advances a model describing how peer assessment supports self-assessment. Although prior research demonstrates that peer assessment promotes self-assessment, the connection between these two activities is underspecified. This model, the assessment cycle, draws from theories of self-assessment to elaborate how learning takes place through peer assessment. The model is applied to three activity structures described in the literature to analyse their potential to support learning by promoting self-assessment. Broadly speaking, the model can be used to understand learning that takes place in a variety of peer assessment activities: marking/grading, analysis, feedback, conferencing and revision. This approach contrasts most studies on peer assessment, which have focused on calibration of instructor and peer grades, rather than learning opportunities.     

Students' perceptions of fairness in peer assessment: evidence from a problem-based learning course

This paper describes the experience of peer assessment in a problem-based learning course in a Portuguese university, and presents the results of a survey of 120 students who attended the course over seven semesters. Cluster analysis revealed that students group into two distinct clusters with significantly different experiences of peer assessment. Although the larger cluster (70%) expressed a positive experience, the other group perceived peer assessment results and final marks to be unfair, and reported incidents of friendship-marking and conflict arising from peer assessment. Results show that perceptions of fairness (both regarding peer assessment and final marks) are very much associated with those problems. We reflect on these findings to explore implications for practice as well as future research.     

University student anonymity in the summative assessment of written work

This paper provides an overview of the issue of student anonymity in the summative assessment of student work in higher education. It considers both theoretical literature pertaining to bias in the evaluation of the work of others and the limited empirical work undertaken on this issue in higher education. It then describes the experience of three higher education institutions in their institutional consideration of student anonymity in assessment. It concludes with an attempt to integrate three perspectives from teaching and learning theory into the anonymity debate, which has largely been conceived in terms of institutional policy, and suggests that there is scope for much further teaching and learning research in the area.     

Student perceptions of peer assessment: an interdisciplinary study

Peer assessment provides students with multiple benefits during their learning process. The aim of our study is to examine students’ perception of peer assessment. Questionnaires were administered before and after the peer-assessment process to 416 students studying 11 different subjects in four different fields taught at the University of Girona. Results suggest that students have a positive predisposition towards this methodology, both before and after its implementation. Students perceive it as a both motivating and recommended methodology that facilitates the acquisition of learning at different levels. As for its limitations, students highlight the responsibility that comes with it and a certain amount of distrust in fellow students’ abilities to peer-assess.     

Outcomes of synergetic peer assessment: first-year experience

Active participation in learning activities and reviewing assessment activity can facilitate learners engaged in these processes. This case study reports student experiences of the process of peer assessment with teacher guidance in a group project for a first-year nursing course with 153 students. Twenty groups of students were assigned roles in exploring one of the two scenarios: one involved analysing diabetes mellitus and the other considered colorectal carcinoma, in each case covering provision of acute nursing care in hospitals and preparing health promotion strategies in a community. Each group also provided comments to the group that worked on the other scenario, based on prearranged assessment criteria. After receiving comments from their peer group, each group was then allowed to revise their drafts prior to final submission. The teacher’s input would be offered, if the peer feedback was inaccurate or insufficient. A survey was conducted to explore the learning experiences, and three semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted to triangulate findings with the survey. The first-year students expressed the need for both peer feedback and the lecturer’s direct guidance.     

The differential effects of task complexity on domain-specific and peer assessment skills

In this study the relationship between domain-specific skills and peer assessment skills as a function of task complexity is investigated. We hypothesised that peer assessment skills were superposed on domain-specific skills and will therefore suffer more when higher cognitive load is induced by increased task complexity. In a mixed factorial design with the between-subjects factor task complexity (simple, n?=?51; complex, n?=?59) and within-subjects factor task type (domain-specific, peer assessment), secondary school students studied four integrated study tasks, requiring them to learn a domain-specific skill (i.e. identifying the six steps of scientific research) and to learn how to assess a fictitious peer performing the same skill. Additionally, the students performed two domain-specific test tasks and two peer assessment test tasks. The interaction effect found on test performance supports our hypothesis. Implications for the teaching and learning of peer assessment skills are discussed.     

The effect of peer assessment on project performance of students at different learning levels

Peer assessment has been increasingly integrated in educational settings as a strategy to foster student learning. Yet little has been studied about how students at different learning levels may benefit from peer assessment. This study examined how peer-assessment and students’ learning levels influenced students’ project performance using a two-way factorial design. One hundred and thirty teacher education students participated in this quasi-experimental study. When working on a technology-integrated lesson plan project, the experimental group completed an online peer assessment process while the control group followed the discussion method. Students’ learning levels were measured and divided into low, average and high achieving according to the quality of their draft lesson plans. Data analysis suggested that the impact of peer assessment on students’ lesson plan project seemed to vary according to students’ learning levels. While low- and average-achieving students showed significantly improved performance right after the integration of a peer assessment model, the model seemed to have had less impact on the performance of high-achieving students. Significance, implications and limitations of findings are discussed.     

Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning?

Peer assessment is a common form of shared learning in which students provide feedback on each others work. Peer assessment takes many forms; and involves students and tutors taking various roles at different stages of the process. This study explores the views and opinions of undergraduate students in relation to their perceptions and experiences of formative peer assessment introduced as a learning development opportunity for the first time. The study found that on the whole formative peer assessment was a positive experience in enhancing students learning and development. However, consideration needs to be taken to address individual learning styles, as a limited number of students found the process to be less useful. Consequently, when tutors are constructing peer assessment strategies they should be cognisant at the planning stage of the variety of learning styles that are evident in order to maximise the development opportunities this can bring to students.     

Assessing postgraduate student perceptions and measures of learning in a peer review feedback process

Peer review feedback, developed to assist students with increasing the quality of group reports and developing peer review skills, was added to a master’s level Climate Change Policy and Planning unit. A pre- and post-survey was conducted to determine whether students found the process a valuable learning opportunity: 87% of students responding to the post-review survey indicated they saw benefit in both developing and receiving peer review feedback. Peer review design minimising the potential for plagiarism resulted in low levels of student concern surrounding plagiarism. Marks allocated by students were valid (consistent with the lecturer) and were generally reliable; however, distribution of marks had a higher variance where group report quality was low. Training on completing the peer review template could result in more reliable feedback. Consistent with the literature, the feedback developed during the peer review process focused on style and presentation preferentially to content. Seven out of eight group reports improved between report submissions, with all groups responding to peer review feedback. Peer review feedback and changes made to group reports indicated students had limited capacity to judge the quality of referencing and critical analysis.     

The role of technology-facilitated peer assessment and supporting strategies: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Technology-facilitated peer assessment is gaining increasing attention. However, evidence for the contribution of technology-facilitated peer assessment to learning achievements has not been investigated. The present meta-analysis integrated findings on the effects of technology-facilitated peer assessment based on two main elements: (1) technology-facilitated peer assessment, (2) the use of extra supporting strategies in technology-facilitated peer assessment. A total of 37 empirical studies published from 1999 to 2018 were selected and analysed. Results indicated that technology-facilitated peer assessment had a significant and medium effect on learning achievements with an overall mean effect size of 0.576. The use of extra supporting strategies in technology-facilitated peer assessment also produced a positive and medium effect on students’ learning achievements with an overall mean effect size of 0.543. Different moderator variables, such as task types, assessment modes, training for assessors, durations, grouping types and assessment methods were related to different effect sizes. The results together with the implications for both practice and research are discussed.     

Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis

Abstract

In recent years, there has been an increasing use of peer assessment in classrooms and other learning settings. Despite the prevailing view that peer assessment has a positive effect on learning across empirical studies, the results reported are mixed. In this meta-analysis, we synthesised findings based on 134 effect sizes from 58 studies. Compared to students who do not participate in peer assessment, those who participate in peer assessment show a .291 standard deviation unit increase in their performance. Further, we performed a meta-regression analysis to examine the factors that are likely to influence the peer assessment effect. The most critical factor is rater training. When students receive rater training, the effect size of peer assessment is substantially larger than when students do not receive such training. Computer-mediated peer assessment is also associated with greater learning gains than the paper-based peer assessment. A few other variables (such as rating format, rating criteria and frequency of peer assessment) also show noticeable, although not statistically significant, effects. The results of the meta-analysis can be considered by researchers and teachers as a basis for determining how to make effective use of peer assessment as a learning tool.     

Investigating secondary school students’ unmediated peer assessment skills

The purpose of this study was to investigate secondary school students’ unmediated peer assessment skills. Specifically, 36 seventh graders, without receiving any kind of support, were anonymously assigned to reciprocally assess their peers’ science web-portfolios. Additionally, students’ attitudes towards and intentions about the use of unsupported reciprocal peer assessment were examined. Three data sources were used, namely, interviews, screen-video captured data, and the peer assessors’ feedback produced. Findings showed that the students have positive attitudes towards unsupported reciprocal peer assessment and that they intend to implement it again. It was also found that students have the skills, at least the beginnings, needed for the implementation of peer assessment. Specifically, they were found to be able to define and use their own assessment criteria, whose overall validity and reliability, however, were found to be low. Finally, the feedback they produced included grades, positive and negative judgments, as well as suggestions for changes.     

Small group discussion as a key component in online assessment training for enhanced student learning in web-based peer assessment

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of online assessment training, with synchronous group discussion as a key component, on subsequent web-based peer assessment results. Participants included 81 college students, mostly women, taking a business writing class. After initial submission of a draft counter-offer letter, they completed online assessment training by engaging in a consensus-seeking, synchronous group discussion of the rubric-based ratings they gave to sample counter-offer letters. They then engaged in web-based assessment of randomly assigned peer counter-offer letters and upon receiving peer feedback, submitted revision of their own counter-offer letter. The discussion groups were randomly assigned to either anonymous (using a pseudo name) or identified conditions (using real name). Findings indicate that the quality of student counter-offer letters improved after online assessment training, and improved even more after web-based peer assessment. There were no significant differences between anonymous discussion groups and identified groups.     

The quality of peer assessment in a wiki-based online context: a qualitative study

Peer assessment (PA) provides opportunities for authentic assessment, autonomy and collaboration. Several authors advocate that students can benefit from PA and put forward the effects of PA on the students’ learning outcomes. Questions concerning the validity and reliability of PA and PA competences are also addressed by different researchers. This qualitative study is part of a wider project that seeks to develop and test evaluation and assessment strategies in online contexts. In a doctoral module, PA was used for summative and formative purposes. Formative PA aimed to give feedback about the ongoing group work, but also to increase online interaction between the different groups of students. The main module task was to write a literature review, about a selected topic, using a wiki. Criteria and indicators to assess the literature review were negotiated with the students. Different criteria were used to assess the quality of PA, such as, the use of the negotiated criteria, the adequacy of the chosen vocabulary or the provision of constructive feedback. The results show that overall the quality of PA can be improved. Groups did not provide sufficient criticism, questions and suggestions for improvement.     

Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment

This study examines the impact of an assessment training module on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Seventy-eight undergraduate students participated in the study. The participants completed an assessment training exercise, prior to engaging in peer-assessment activities. During the training, students reviewed learning concepts, discussed marking criteria, graded example projects and compared their evaluations with the instructor’s evaluation. Data were collected in the form of initial and final versions of students’ projects, students’ scoring of example projects before and after the assessment training, and written feedback that students provided on peer projects. Results of data analysis indicate that the assessment training led to a significant decrease in the discrepancy between student ratings and instructor rating of example projects. In addition, the degree of student vs. instructor discrepancy was highly predictive of the quality of feedback that students provided to their peers and the effectiveness of revisions that they made to their own projects upon receiving peer feedback. Smaller discrepancies in ratings were associated with provision of higher quality peer feedback during peer assessment, as well as better revision of initial projects after peer assessment.     

Student perceptions of assessment and student self-efficacy in competence-based education

The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the interplay between student perceptions of competence-based assessment and student self-efficacy, and how this influences student learning outcomes. Results reveal that student perceptions of the form authenticity aspect and the quality feedback aspect of assessment do predict student self-efficacy, confirming the role of mastery experiences and social persuasions in enhancing student self-efficacy as stated by social cognitive theory. Findings do not confirm mastery experiences as being a stronger source of self-efficacy information than social persuasions. Study results confirm the predictive role of students’ self-efficacy on their competence outcomes. Mediation analysis results indicate that student’s perceptions of assessment have an indirect effect on student’s competence evaluation outcomes through student’s self-efficacy. Study findings highlight which assessment characteristics, positively influencing students’ learning, contribute to the effectiveness of competence-based education. Limitations of the study and directions for future research are indicated.     

Peer assessment in the digital age: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings

Given the wide use of peer assessment, especially in higher education, the relative accuracy of peer ratings compared to teacher ratings is a major concern for both educators and researchers. This concern has grown with the increase of peer assessment in digital platforms. In this meta-analysis, using a variance-known hierarchical linear modelling approach, we synthesise findings from studies on peer assessment since 1999 when computer-assisted peer assessment started to proliferate. The estimated average Pearson correlation between peer and teacher ratings is found to be .63, which is moderately strong. This correlation is significantly higher when: (a) the peer assessment is paper-based rather than computer-assisted; (b) the subject area is not medical/clinical; (c) the course is graduate level rather than undergraduate or K-12; (d) individual work instead of group work is assessed; (e) the assessors and assessees are matched at random; (f) the peer assessment is voluntary instead of compulsory; (g) the peer assessment is non-anonymous; (h) peer raters provide both scores and qualitative comments instead of only scores; and (i) peer raters are involved in developing the rating criteria. The findings are expected to inform practitioners regarding peer assessment practices that are more likely to exhibit better agreement with teacher assessment.