Peer Evaluation of Assessments without Grading: A Pilot of Adaptive Comparative Judgment

TitlePeer Evaluation of Assessments without Grading: A Pilot of Adaptive Comparative Judgment
Duration1 Year
Project Summary

This proposal builds upon the well-established benefits to learning that accrue from encouraging student learners to review their own and others' work, i.e. self- and peer-assessment. In contrast to other approaches that essentially train novices to be able to provide expert feedback (such as calibrated peer-review), we take a different approach, based on a longstanding psychophysics principle known as the Law of Comparative Judgment (Thurstone, 1927). Expressed simply, this principle states that humans can reliably make comparative judgments as to the relative quality of one of a pair of artifacts compared with the other. We apply this principle in the context of students providing comparative judgments of the quality of each other's text-based answers to particular assessment questions. The proposal seeks development funding to extend the capabilities of a proof-of-concept software prototype developed in Summer 2013, and proposes pilot implementation studies in early-years undergraduate courses in mathematics and English.

Funding Details
Year 1: Project YearYear 1
Year 1: Funding Year2014/2015
Year 1: Project TypeSmall TLEF
Year 1: Principal InvestigatorMark MacLean
Year 1: Funded Amount53,417
Year 1: Team Members

Mark MacLean, Instructor, Mathematics, Faculty of Science
Tiffany Potter, Instructor, English, Faculty of Arts
Simon Bates, Professor of Teaching, Physics and Astronomy, Faculty of Science / Academic Director, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology