Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Moodle for peer review


Published on

A session I gave to the University of Glasgow as part of our CPD events

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Moodle for peer review

  1. 1. Using Moodle for Peer Review Sarah Honeychurch @NomadWarMachine
  2. 2. Why use Peer Assessment/Review? "..if we want students to develop critical thinking, judgement and autonomy in assignment production they should be provided with high-level evaluative experiences similar to those of experts. Peer review, students evaluating and commenting on each other's work, is one way to achieve this.”
  3. 3. Peer assessment or peer review? • Definitions – Assessment – gives grade – Review – gives feedback but no grade – Two aspects: • Writing reviews of others’ work • Receiving reviews on own work from peers “… many students dislike being asked to mark other students work and receiving marks from other students. There are many reasons for this, including a belief by students that their peers do not have the expertise to mark reliably. In contrast, students are usually very positive about the benefits of peer review processes where marking is not involved.”
  4. 4. Peer assessment? • Benefits: – Students (say that they) want more feedback – Students (say that they) want prompt feedback – Does not take (much) extra staff time • Problems: – Concerns about the reliability of student marking (quantity over quality?) – Students don’t like grading peers
  5. 5. Peer Review • Benefits of receiving peer review – Accessible language of peers – Variety of feedback – Conflict of feedback mirrors professional life (must process and decide what to accept/reject) • Benefits of giving peer review – Constructing feedback requires cognitive engagement • Knowledge construction • Engagement with assessment criteria • Developing discipline specific writing skills – Variety of approaches can stimulate self-reflection • Issues – Summative assessment?
  6. 6. Online Tools for peer assessment/review • Moodle Workshop • New LTI tool: ACJ (Adaptive Comparative Judgement) • Other options – Moodle Wiki – Moodle Forums
  7. 7. Moodle Workshop • Similar student interface to Moodle Assignment • Options for self, peer and tutor review • Options for review or assessment • Option to assign tutor mark for submission and for review
  8. 8. Moodle Workshop • Grading Strategy: – Accumulative – Comments and grades given – Comments – Comments but no grades – Number of errors – Comments and yes/no responses – Rubric - Marked against specified criteria • If using grades, can set %ages of grade: – Given to them for their submission – Given to them for their peer assessment
  9. 9. Moodle Workshop • Submission settings – Can add clear guidance of how/what to submit – Can restrict file types • Assessment settings – Can include self assessment – Can include an example assessment • Feedback settings – Can ask/require students to give overall comment – Can allow upload of feedback files • Standard Moodle options for groups/restricted access
  10. 10. Moodle Workshop “Gotchas” manual selection through phases
  11. 11. Moodle Workshop “Gotchas” – look for greyed out tick marks
  12. 12. Moodle Workshop “Gotchas” – look for red crosses
  13. 13. Adaptive Comparative Judgement • Thurstone (psychophysics); Pollitt • Students are presented with (random) pairs of submissions and judge better/worse • Software uses iterative and adaptive algorithm to sort submissions • Staff can “seed” submissions to provide grade boundaries Pollitt, A (2012) The method of Adaptive Comparative Judgement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 19: 3, 1-20. DOI:10.1080/0969594X.2012.665354
  14. 14. Adaptive Comparative Judgement • Benefits – Timely feedback – Easier than peer assessment – Little staff time – Has inter and intra rater reliability • Issues – Trust in new system – Complex criteria – Rich feedback investigating-the-reliability-of-adaptive-comparative-judgment.pdf
  15. 15. Adaptive Comparative Judgement • Learning Tools Interoperability (LTI) • Add external tool • ACJ Experimental • Comparisons: – Students may submit – Students must submit – Teacher uploads • Teacher uploads review guidelines
  16. 16. Adaptive Comparative Judgement • Submission options: – Paste web page url – Paste YouTube url – Type into HTML editor – Upload PDF – Upload image – Type/paste source code • Ranking options – Teachers – Students (peers) • Scoring options – Based on final rank – Bsed on judgement participation – Based on rank and participation
  17. 17. Discussion • Do you trust students to peer review responsibly? – Why/not? • Do you think peer assessment or review are preferable? • What about ACJ – Would you be interested in using it?
  18. 18. Using Moodle for Peer Review Sarah Honeychurch @NomadWarMachine ACJ: