I’ve found that my students often struggle with applying abstract mathematical concepts and methods in practical scenarios. To overcome this, I designed a peer-marking assessment.
As well as promoting fairness and accountability, peer marking enhances students’ evaluative judgement, or the ability to make informed decisions about the quality of one’s own work and that of others, which is an essential skill for independent learning.
As part of my peer-marked assessment, students completed coursework projects that required them to apply mathematical theories to their engineering contexts. At the end of the semester, they had to submit a group report based on their investigation using peer-marking methodology. Every member of the group had to assess each other’s contribution.
How to get students comfortable with peer marking
My students had no prior experience in peer marking and initially found the process difficult. Some were overly modest and rated all their group members’ contributions higher than their own, while others were overly confident and evaluated all their group members’ participation as lower than theirs. Some did not feel comfortable evaluating their classmates and gave all their group members the same mark for their contributions. It became clear very quickly that I needed to help them learn how to mark their peers’ work fairly.
I did this by running a training session to guide students on how to use rubrics. I first discussed the advantages of peer marking, explaining its potential to improve their ability to evaluate and analyse work and draw accurate conclusions. I highlighted the importance of these skills in further study and employment contexts. I also emphasised that giving and receiving feedback helps students prepare more effectively for assessments. Then, I provided instructions, along with a marking scheme with rubrics.
I also established a few key rules:
Students had to assess every member of their group. This was because in previous peer-marking exercises, some students would only assess the class members they knew well, rather than every member of the group. This disadvantaged some students who didn’t receive as much feedback as others.
Students could not give consistently high ratings for each group member unless they genuinely believed it was a fair and accurate reflection of that student’s work. This was to prevent students grading based on familiarity with group members, rather than contribution.
- Guiding students to learn from each other through peer feedback
- Opinion: If peer feedback was good enough for the Brontë sisters, it’s good enough for us
- Assessment and feedback as an active dialogue between tutors and students
Grading criteria
Students had to use the following grading criteria as a guide and give marks out of a total of 30.
Outstanding: 4-5 marks
Quality of discussion input: sound evidence that student has done course readings and has a thorough knowledge of discussion topic.
Critical thinking and self-reflection: exceptionally well-supported, thoughtful, insightful comments made on others’ and own contributions.
Reliability and responsibility: usually highly prepared, more so than others; takes initiative in finding valuable resources; exceptionally thorough follow-through on tasks; exerts more effort than others.
Participation in group work: helps get others involved in the discussion; helps others with their research assignments; takes an effective lead in discussions and moving the group learning forward.
Effort: produced additional resources for the group; demonstrated extraordinary effort.
Contribution: outstanding contribution; above and beyond; work is excellent in form and substance.
Good: 2-3 marks
Quality of discussion input: evidence that most course readings were done and student has some knowledge of discussion topic.
Critical thinking and self-reflection: some evidence of critical thought and self-reflection on others’ and own postings.
Reliability and responsibility: consistently prepared; has always read required materials and completed assigned tasks; always on time and ready to work.
Participation in group work: cooperative and considerate of others; listens well and avoids interrupting others; contributes regularly by asking questions and sharing information.
Effort: fully prepared; completed all agreed tasks; competent, but not extraordinary.
Contribution: good-quality work; few revisions or additions are necessary.
Developing 0-1 marks
Quality of discussion input: minor evidence that course readings were completed and student understands the discussion topic.
Critical thinking and self-reflection: minor evidence of critical thought and reflection on others’ and own contributions.
Reliability and responsibility: little evidence of reading or independent study: fails to follow through with self-directed learning tasks.
Participation in group work: disrupts group with irrelevant comments; takes up excessive group time without contributing much; simply does not participate.
Effort: minimal preparation; superficial knowledge of resources; minimal effort.
Contribution: poor-quality work; substantive errors; much revision and editing is required.
Reflection and key lessons
Training students to evaluate each other’s work using marking rubrics promotes more equitable assessments, as students feel they are all being judged against the same standards. Peer marking helps students to develop their own evaluative judgement, leading to a deeper understanding of their own work.
When surveyed, students strongly agreed that they found peer marking useful for evaluating others’ contributions to a group project. They recognised this method could provide insights that instructors might not, and that it helped them identify and understand their own mistakes. They also said that having a clear understanding of the assessment criteria promoted consistency and fairness.
With the right training and structure, peer evaluation becomes a valuable tool for bridging the gap between theoretical understanding and practical application.
Anirudha Poria is an assistant professor in the School of Mathematics and Physics at Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University in China.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment