An investigation into the perceived value of peer assessment as a summative assessment method for final year

Occupational Therapy, Physiotherapy and Podiatry students during their group

dissertation projects: A student perspective

Huddersfield

University of the year!

Inter-professional work

• Interdisciplinary work is becoming the “norm” in UK health care

• Ability to give and receive criticism in order to enhance achievement of shared goals is essential (Nancarrow et al, 2013).

• Confidence to assess peers could lead to improvements in overall care (Francis 2013)

Inter-professional research atundergraduate level

• Students work in small groups to undertake a piece of empirical research

Examples include:- - Systematic literature reviews- Qualitative projects- Quantitative projects- Clinical audits

Research 3 – module breakdown

• An individual 6,000 word dissertation – 75% module mark

• Group presentation at conference – 25% module mark

• Individual mark for group work depends on scores of peer assessment

The conference

Peer assessment sheet

Data Collection

Group Member Overall ability to work as a member of the team

Takes responsibility for a group task/s

Demonstrates negotiation skills

Ability to listen support and respond to group members

Overall contribution to the data collection process

W. Rooney 30 40 30 35 40

S. Gerrard          

J. Hart 30 30 30 35 30

F. Lampard 20 15 20 15 15

R. Sterling 20 15 20 15 15

Total 100 100 100 100 100

An example

Student A and Student B are from the same group

  Student A Student B

Dissertation score 72% 72%

Group presentation score

62% 62%

Peer assessment weighting

1.1 0.9

Individual score for group presentation

68% 56%

Overall module score 71% 68%

Aim and Objectives

Aim • To explore students’ perceptions of peer assessment.

 Objectives• Explore the perceived confidence in their ability to peer

assess• Explore their perceived benefits and limitations of peer

assessment• Explore whether it is a meaningful way to peer assess

summatively

Sampling and data collection

• Purposive sample of final year podiatry, physiotherapy and occupational therapy students.

• Recruitment took place after final marks for the module had been awarded

• Two focus groups (n=5 and 3) • Questions and prompts generated from aims and

objectives

Data Analysis

• Conventional content analysis using a thematic approach (Hsieu-Fang and Shannon 2005)

• Themes were derived by the three researchers independently and consensus was reached through discussion

Data Analysis - teamwork

Highlighter pens and ring binders

Word processed, numbered and indexed lists

Scraps of paper with doodles and diagrams

Findings

Level 4 themes:-

• The process of peer assessment (+ve and –ve)

• The influence of peer assessment on group work (+ve and –ve)

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4Influence on degree Influence on degree Understanding of process Process of peer

assessmentMore guidance/criteria More guidance/criteria

More guidance/criteria How to measure effort vs contribution

Trust/confidence in assessment skills

ResponsibilitySkill eg IT deserves

more?

Attendance = work?Leader deserves more?

Skill eg IT deserves more?

Attendance = work?Lack of numeracy skills Lack of numeracy skills

Lack of transparency Lack of transparency feedback

Lack of feedbackTiming of peer

assessmentTiming of peer assessment Logistics of assessment

Confidentiality (at conference)

Confidentiality (at conference)

Effort should be rewarded

+ve perceptions of peer assessment

Perceptions

Unfairness -ve perceptions of peer assessment

Key quotes - Process of peer assessment

• “They haven’t got to prove that you’ve not done that work and you can’t defend yourself and say no I have done that work…” (162, W3, pg 8)

• “…because I do think there is a lot of, you get on really well therefore you’ll dish out even marks…” (235, W1, pg 11)

Key quotes - Process of peer assessment

• “we’d be thinking of that person who only got 40% in their … thing [dissertation] and we were trying to make it up … save them, even though we all worked hard we were thinking of that poor person.” (FG1, P6)

• “…You’ve got all this pressure o’ filling it in and you’re trying to calculate how much a hundred works out between seven…” (FG1. P 26)

Blame Sensitivity regarding bullying behaviours

Assessment focussed

Influence of peer

assessment on group

work

Suspicious

Liked/ or not

Sly/ lack of trust

Insecurities

Fairness

Honesty

Academic ability Personal tensions

Balancing commitments

Support

Caring

Pressure

Emotional: Stress

Performance in group (Take over/ disengage) Strategic traits

Negotiation

Control

Meaning

Professional Groups: Alliances

Selfish

Worry about free-riders Free riding

Deliberate free-riding

Down-grading colleagues Manipulation of marks

Ensuring colleagues passed

Professional Groups: Alliances Interprofessional issues

Key quotes - Influence of peer assessment on group work (+ve)

• “…… if you didn’t do peer review it would give some people the option not to get involved ….. and you [the tutor] would not know who has put the work in.” (FG1, P1)

• “It encouraged people to make sure that everyone tried to take an equal part”. (FG2)

Key quotes - Influence of peer assessment on group work (-ve)

• “…I think it was difficult at times because certain people wanted to do well erm, and so they try, they would try and ensure that they could take on as many jobs as possible…” (FG 2 line 29 - )

• “I think there is a problem, I think people see it as a way to get marked up.” FG 1 line 43

Conclusions

.Objectives• Explore the perceived

confidence in their ability to peer assess

• Explore their perceived benefits and limitations of peer assessment

• Explore whether it is a meaningful way to peer assess summatively

Findings• Participants did not feel

confident to peer assess• Helped prevent free

riders but could also skew work rate/activities

• Peer assessment is a good idea but our method needs “tweaking”

Literature

• Students have mixed perceptions of Peer Assessment (Kench, Field and Agudera 2009)

• Peer assessment is often used to prevent free riding in group work (Maiden and Perry 2010)

• Peer assessment carries some risks of bullying (Elliott and Higgins 2004)

• Much of the research is quantitative in nature and based on uni-professional group work

Recommendations/ considerations

• Clearer information to be provided as part of module including example calculation to demonstrate the impact of the process

• Consider transparency of the process – remove anonymity?

• Consideration of timings and methods• Introduce peer assessment formatively earlier in the

degree• More involvement from supervisors to help develop peer

assessment skills/ devise group-specific criteria.

What next?

Nurses (adult, child, mental health, learning disability)

Midwives

Operating department practitioners

Podiatrists

Physiotherapists

Occupational therapists

ANY QUESTIONS?

Thank you for your time.

References

• Francis, R. (2013) Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Enquiry [online] available at http://www.midstaffspublicinquiry.com/sites/default/files/report/Executive%20summary.pdf [last accessed 16th September 2013]

• Hsieu-Fang, H. and Shannon, S.E. (2005) ‘Three approaches to qualitative content analysis’ Qualitative Health Research No.15, pp 1277 – 1288

• Kench, P.L., Field, N., Agudera, M., and Gill, M., (2009) ‘Peer assessment of individual contributions to a group project: student perceptions.’ Radiography No 15 pp158 - 165

• Maiden, B. and Perry, B. (2010) ‘Dealing with free-riders in assessed group work: results from a UK university’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education Vol. 36, No. 4, pp 451 – 464