Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Peer Assessment: A Case for Student and Staff Development

Abstract

This paper reports an action research project to evaluate an intervention designed to increase students' confidence in an undergraduate peer assessment of posters in Psychology. The intervention set out to maximize the benefits of peer assessment to student learning by explicitly developing and working with marking criteria, and improving the fairness and consistency of students' marking through a trial marking exercise. Evidence from qualitative evaluation questionnaires suggested that students' initial resistance to the peer assessment was transformed by their participation in these processes. After the intervention the range of marks used by students increased at the same time as variability significantly decreased. Quantitative and qualitative data from module appraisal forms completed by students also demonstrated increased transparency and greater confidence in the peer marking process compared with the year before. The study raises issues for student support and staff development in using peer assessment.