A Systematic Review of Technology-Supported Peer Assessment Research

Abstract

With the advancement of information and communication technologies, technology-supported peer assessment has been increasingly adopted in education recently. This study systematically reviewed 134 technology-supported peer assessment studies published between 2006 and 2017 using a developed analysis framework based on activity theory. The results found that most peer assessment activities were implemented in social science and higher education in the past 12 years. Acting assignments such as performance, oral presentations, or speaking were the least common type of assignments assessed across the studies reviewed. In addition, most studies conducted peer assessment anonymously and assessors and assessees were randomly assigned. However, most studies implemented only one round of peer assessment and did not provide rewards for assessors. Across studies, it was more often the case that students received unstructured feedback from their peers than structured feedback. Noticeably, collaborative peer assessment did not receive enough attention in the past 12 years. Regarding the peer assessment tools, there were more studies that adopted general learning management systems for peer assessment than studies that used dedicated peer assessment tools. However, most tools used within these studies only provide basic functionalities without scaffolding. Furthermore, the results of cross analysis reveal that there are significant relationships between learning domains and anonymity as well as learning domains and assessment durations. Significant relationships also exist between assignment types and learning domains as well as assignment types and assessment durations.The relationships between assignment types to be assessed and learning domains are shown in Table 10. As shown in Table 10, there was a positive relationship between assignment types and learning domains in the past 12 years (χ 2 = 30.96, p = 0.000). The adjusted residual value indicated that writing essays in social science subject domains had the fastest increasing trend (AR = 5.0), followed by artefacts in engineering and technological science (AR = 2.6) and natural science (AR = 2.2). On the other hand, writing essays in engineering and technological science domains (AR = -3.2) and in

Teamwork Effectiveness in Student’s Final Year Project

“…These monitoring and evaluations exercises are in line by previous works [5] [10] [17]- [19] [22] [25]- [28] [35] and [36].…”

The Use of Digital Peer Assessment in Higher Education—An Umbrella Review of Literature

“…A variety of student work can be assessed by peers. PA can be performed on different types of outputs, including written texts (e.g., essays, research proposals, lesson plans), artifacts (e.g., images, audio, video, source code, design product), or an action (e.g., performance, delivery of a lesson for peers, presentations) [14], [17], [34], [37]. However, PA is not only about these products of learning, and can also be focused on the behavior associated with learning processes [34].…”

“…What is being assessed highly depends on the domain in which the PA activity is conducted, and the learning outcomes that are associated with this domain. In social sciences, courses tend to be oriented toward writing texts and as a result, students most often assess each other's essays [37]. In engineering and technological sciences, there is an emphasis on design and creation, as such products being assessed are often artifacts such as prototypes, designs (of cars, aircraft, machines, etc.…”

“…Lecturers have the choice to provide students with assessment criteria, let students (co-)create the assessment criteria, or provide no assessment criteria at all. Multiple review papers highlight that in almost all cases of PA, assessment criteria were predefined by the lecturer [14], [34], [35], [37], [39], [40]. It is notable that students are rarely invited to contribute to the development of assessment criteria, since it is acknowledged that co-creation of these criteria could lead to more engagement, reduce anxiety, and create a sense of ownership [14], [34].…”

“…In the reviews, three types of feedback can be found that are used in PA: qualitative feedback, quantitative feedback, and a mix of these two [36], [37], [40]. Quantitative feedback can take the form of Boolean criteria (e.g., check box to indicate if certain criteria are present), discrete choices (e.g., choice between a number of specified criteria), or numeric scales (e.g., rating on a 1-10 scale) [37], [39]. Qualitative feedback can be given in a written or oral form [36], [39].…”