learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Linda Martin et al.
confidence. Although these feelings became more positive as the pilot progressed it is their anxieties
which they recall immediately. Key issues identified by the students that responded can be
summarized as follows:
The challenges for them indicate that the pilot has encouraged them to reflect more on what
contributes to a good piece of work. It was noted that it was easier to be critical of others than it
was to identify the good points which they had to consciously think about.
A significant point was also made regarding their own experience at the time of their involvement
in the pilot. For some this was the first piece of work they had written. They had no indication of
whether their own work was of a satisfactory standard or whether they had understood the
question. This added to the feelings of anxiety.
The benefits noted related to increased engagement. One student commented that prior to the
pilot comments put on the discussion forums had received no response from others, so it
provided an opportunity to communicate. The pilot also provided the opportunity for some group
learning as the final mark had to be agreed by several students working together.
Additionally, the exercise contributed to the students' understanding of the difference between a
good and bad essay by being able to read the work of others. However, they did not feel that the
feedback received from other students about their own work helped their learning as the
comments tended to be short.
For some, it has helped them to be more critical of their own work and has increased their
confidence. However, part of this increase is due to feeling that their own work was better than
the assignments they marked.
6. Staff perceptions
The three staff involved in the pilot were asked to comment on the challenges, the benefits and the
lessons learned. The feedback can be summarized as follows:
For staff implementing peer assessment there have been a series of process issues which have
required an immediate response before being able to reflect on whether the exercise was
achieving its aim. The technology was challenging. Although all the team were familiar with
Turnitin and can use this with ease, the Peer Mark option proved to be much more challenging. In
addition to the added time spent there were ongoing concerns about whether it would work as
intended, providing a smooth efficient submission system which protected the identity of students.
The student response during the pilot was disappointing. Some students had to be constantly
reminded and guided through the process whilst others, who were waiting for them to complete
their marking, had to be appeased. One refused to take part and another went on holiday without
completing the process. This led to an unequal distribution of work and adjustments were made to
the marking criteria on the next occasion to reflect this and encourage participation.
Attempts were made to involve students at a very early stage of the process, determining the
marking criteria, but only one student contributed to this while the others waited to be told what to
do.
Although the process issues created some negative responses, the results of the exercise were more
encouraging. The marks suggested by students were usually closely related to those the lecturer
would have given, although there was greater coherence in relation to the final agreed group mark
rather than the individually suggested student marks. The agreed process was that the lecturer would
only change marks given by the students where there was significant concern about the mark given,
but this was not defined with exactitude. For level 1 student’s precise marks are of less significance
as they do not contribute to the degree classification but for levels 2 and 3 the significance increases
and students question their given mark more and expect the mark to be clearly justified.
7. Discussion
The pilot is currently being reviewed to determine how it will proceed into its second year but a
number of issues have been raised by these preliminary results. The initial purpose of the pilot was to
increase student engagement and as a result increase academic achievement. To date the
experience has called to question whether engagement and achievement are linked, whether there
are other more effective ways of improving student achievement, and whether engagement is a
shared utopia between students and lecturers or only a vision of lecturers.
452