The document discusses the implementation of the WebPA peer feedback and assessment tool during a science and engineering workshop on December 17, 2010, addressing the increasing student enrollment and the need for enhanced group work evaluation. It details the assessment types used, student feedback, and highlights both positive and negative responses to the peer assessment process, emphasizing the importance of technical support. The initiative remains in the pilot phase with plans for future development and ongoing evaluations.

1. Groupwork with WebPA
Peer Feedback and Assessment for
Science and Engineering Workshop
17th December 2010

2. Background to use
• Increasing numbers of students
– Rising from 16 in 2008 to 74 in 2010
• Feedback from students on groupwork
– ↑ groupwork in assignments
• Feedback from students on peer assessment
– Recognition of input into the groupwork
– Not all group members receiving the same mark

3. Why WebPA?
• JISC-recommended tool
• Met our assessment development
requirements
• Simple interface
• Discussion with Stephen Vickers
• Intrepid students willing to take part in
the pilot
• Free!

4. Setting up an assessment
A three-step process:
• Create a criteria form
• Create groups
• Create an assessment

5. Create a criteria form

7. Create groups

8. Create an assessment

15. Grading assessments
• Straightforward tool for students and
staff
• The WebPA grading algorithm adapts
the group mark from the student grading
results to create the final mark
• Good range of reports and report
formats available

16. Impact of WebPA algorithm

18. Assessment types used
• Three types of assessment used
• 1. Preparation of advisory booklet (yr 1 students)
– On dietary management of nutrition-related disorder
– One of two assessments on a 20 credit course
– 1000 word limit
– Worth 50 % of the total marks for the course
– Graded each other using WebPA
– Weighting factor 20 %

19. Assessment types used
• 2. Preparation of presentation (year 2 students)
– On aspect of exercise physiology
– 25 minute Powerpoint presentation
– One assessment on a 10 credit course
– Worth 100 % of the total marks for the course
– Graded each other using WebPA
– Weighting factor 20 %

20. Assessment types used
• 3. Preparation of presentation & abstract (yr 1)
– On aspect of equine science
– 25 minute Powerpoint presentation & 4 page abstract
– One of two assessments on a 20 credit course
– Worth 50 % of the total marks for the course
– Graded each other and themselves using WebPA
– Weighting factor 20 %

21. Feedback booklet - positive
• Most students said they would be happy to use WebPA
again
• A small number of students had technical difficulties, but
these were resolved
• Many students liked the group work and felt it brought the
group together
• Many liked that their mark could be partially influenced by
their peers

22. Feedback booklet - comments
“The group assignment was quite challenging to get
everybody together but it definitely opened my eyes to
how other people work differently to achieve the same
goals. Also it is a good lesson in compromise, you have
to accept other peoples perspective because the
assignment belongs to the whole group.”

23. Feedback booklet - negative
• A small number of students did not like the group work
• A small number of students did not like the use of peer
assessment
• “I don’t think its fair that the peers grade each other as
due to individual time constraints some people are not
able to be able to be as involved when the others want
them to be causing a negative feedback from the other
peers.”

24. Feedback booklet - negative
• “I don’t understand why the peer assessment was a
part of the assignment mark? How is our ability to peer
assess be relevant to our mark for Equine Science? I
see the benefit of doing it but I don’t think it should be
part of an assessment.”

25. Feedback presentation &
abstract - positive
• Most students said happy to use WebPA again
• A few students had technical difficulties, but these were
resolved
– “WebPA was easy to use.”
• Some students liked the group work and felt it brought
the group together (not as many as year 1)
• Some liked that their mark could be partially influenced
by their peers (not as may as year 1)

26. Feedback presentation &
abstract - negative
• Some students did not like the group work
• Some students did not like the use of peer assessment
• Some students had technical difficulties
• “WebPA was difficult to use for me. Only with prof help I
resolved the technical hitches.”

27. Feedback presentation &
abstract – negative
“I did not like the group assignment. I do recognize
the importance of work in a group, but I believe that
we as adults with social lives, work and study cope
with these issues very regularly. And the assignment
didn't feel as my personal work, which I regret and
had to do differently. At the same time the lessons
were going on and it was hard to perform both tasks
well in only 5 weeks.”

28. Feedback overall
• Overall the feedback was positive
• The technical support was key to the success
• One student misunderstood how the group mark was
affected
• Clarification on WebPA adjustment of mark resolved
this

29. Where do we go from here?
• Still in the pilot phase
• WebCT course authentication process
• Contact IS Helpline:
IS.Helpline@ed.ac.uk

30. Thank you
• Jo-Anne Murray
jo-anne.murray@ed.ac.uk
• Sharon Boyd
sharon.boyd@ed.ac.uk