This presentation sets out the design rationale, and experiences in practice, of a peer review tool implemented to assess contribution and participation in group-based projects (including undergraduate production thesis projects) on Dublin City University’s BSc In Multimedia programme. While the issues and difficulties around the management and assessment of group work at university level are well attested in the literature (Davies, 2009), practical strategies to provide effective peer review mechanisms as a formative component of project-based learning are more difficult to find.
The tool developed for DCU’s Multimedia programme is founded on principles of excellence in the design of university assessment (Carless, 2015), in particular on the work of David Nichol, and is intended as a generalisable tool for peer review with larger class sizes. It is electronically deployed and collated, is rubric-based, and follows Nichol’s “Principles of good peer review design” (2014, p. 209), prompting considered reflection on the part of the students, guiding them toward thematic areas of evaluation with clear categorisation of the various components of effective group participation. Importantly for the context of the contemporary undergraduate programme cohort, the tool leverages contemporary web technologies (Google Forms) to aid its effective deployment and analysis for larger class sizes where paper-based strategies or the requirement for individual detailed examination by a teacher become cumbersome and may limit or prevent effective use.
The tool was designed in 2017 and has been piloted and subsequently deployed on a variety of module types with group-based assessment, including its iterative use on the large-scale thesis group production projects in the DCU programme. This period has also included semi-structured interviews with students who have used the tool. Data derived from this evaluation of the tool in use will be presented, providing comparisons with previous methods of group review, as well as insights into the process and value of such review from the students. Specifically, the strategies developed during the pilot phase of the tool’s design in response to student feedback about accountability and anonymity in peer review processes may be of interest to educators implementing other systems of assessment, while insights on how learners used the structured review processes of the tool to aid learning and group dynamics may be useful to those exploring wider reflective practices in teaching and learning (Ashwin, 2016).
References
Ashwin, P. (2016) Reflective teaching in higher education.
Carless, D. (2015) Excellence in university assessment: learning from award-winning teaching. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY: Routledge.
Davies, W. M. (2009) ‘Groupwork as a form of assessment: common problems and recommended solutions’, Higher Education, 58(4), pp. 563–584. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9216-y.
Nichol, D. (2014) ‘Guiding principles of peer review: Unlocking learners’ evaluative skills’, in Kreber, C. et al. (eds) Advances and Innovations in University Assessment and Feedback. Edinburgh University Press. doi: 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748694549.001.0001.
Topics: Innovations and Design in Online and Blended Learning , Topics: Assessment and Feedback in a Digital Age
