More Blessed to Give Than Receive – A Study of Peer-assessment of Experimental Design

Abstract

Involving students in the process of classroom assessment through self- and peer-assessment is sometimes motivated by benefits gained from students’ metacognitive reflections on criteria in relation to current work. However, prior research on higher education has noticed discrepancies between student and teacher assessment as well as students displaying inabilities to use suggestions for improvement. One prior explanation has been that there are differences among students concerning what is valued as ‘good quality’. In this study we investigate how students make meaning of peer-assessment in two Swedish lower secondary schools working with laboratory design. The rationale of the study is to explore the function of peer-assessment in science education, and for that purpose, this work takes an emic perspectives on student-to-student interaction as they collaboratively negotiate how to use received peer-feedback. The empirical basis for the study is an intervention into science classroom practice in collaboration with their science teachers. Data was collected from student written work and audio- and video-taped discussions. Data were analysed with the theoretical framework of Communities of Practice. Type of feedback offered by students differed from ‘personal suggestions’ on what they preferred to eat and do, to sources of errors effect on the validity of a student's research. One main finding was that the majority of the students used the feedback provided by themselves to other students in their own amendment. Also, students’ group discussion seemed to be an important resource for how the students addressed the peer-feedback.