A Mixed Method Research on Peer Assessment

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between peer assessment and instructor assessment and make a comparison with views of preservice teachers. Since qualitative and quantitative methods were used together in the study, it was grounded on the mixed method approach. The quantitative data in this study, in which 27 preservice teachers participated on a voluntary basis, were obtained from scoring rubric whereas qualitative data were obtained from a semi-structured interview form prepared by the researchers. Statistical analyses were conducted to analyze the quantitative data collected within the scope of the study, whereas Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to analyze the relationship between instructor assessment and peer assessment, and paired samples t test was used to determine the differences between pairwise groups. The qualitative data, on the other hand, were analyzed using the content analysis technique. As a result of the analysis, it was seen that there was a positive and significant correlation between instructor assessment and peer assessment. When the preservice teachers’ views were examined, those views rose to prominence stating that making assessments contributed to learning; they grew aware of imperfect knowledge; questioning and critical thinking improved, and fair assessment skills developed. This was interpreted to mean that preservice teachers could distinguish between adequate and inadequate work. However, when the preservice teachers’ views concerning their assessments by their peers were examined, the view attracted attention stating that friendship relations and personal problems affected assessment negatively and therefore peers gave low scores. At this point, when the mean scores were examined, it was seen that mean peer scores were higher than instructor mean scores. This was interpreted to mean that some preservice teachers did not have confidence in their peers.

Impromptu Speaking Skills of Pre-service Teachers

“…In studies conducted with university students (Dundar, 2016;Gurbuzoglu-Yalmanci, 2016;Hasirci, 2018;Izgar & Akturk, 2018;Sarpkaya-Aktas, 2017), it was revealed that students did not trust their peers' evaluation. In the study by Cheng & Warren (2005), it was determined that university students studying in the engineering department did not rely on their own language competences while evaluating their friends during their oral presentations and did not make an objective assessment because they did not have a command of these competences.…”

“…Peer evaluation includes tasks that require time for reflection, comparison and communication (Topping, 1998). Studies on the negative aspects of peer evaluation (Cheng and Warren, 2005;Dundar, 2016;Gurbuzoglu-Yalmanci, 2016;Hamzadayi and Dolek, 2017;Hasirci, 2018;Izgar and Akturk, 2018;Ozdemir and Erdem, 2017;Panadero and Brown, 2017;Sarpkaya-Aktas, 2017) indicate that there is a problem of objectivity in peer evaluation. Peer and self-evaluation approaches also play an important role in teacher training programs and can positively affect pre-service teachers' professional lives by improving their academic performance (Roberts, as cited in Aslanoglu, 2017).…”

Artificial Intelligence for Assessment and Feedback to Enhance Student Success in Higher Education

“…ere are a lot of survey studies revolving around assessments which are about the nature of assessments, including summative assessment and the formative assessment and the impact on students learning performance, motivation, and provide high-quality learning [6,23,24]. It is also seen that there are numerous studies on peer, and self-assessment arrived at the conclusion that peer, and self-assessment promoted student success, their participation in course and skills [25][26][27][28]. However, there is very modest elaboration in how to design assessment practices and make reliable judgments.…”

How do Students Perform a Peer Assessment?

“…It will affect the quality of the scores. Furthermore, some results of peer assessment are dubious (Izgar & Akturk, 2018). However, Topping (1998) argued that undergraduate students have mature age and are able to think and to be trusted.…”