1) The study examined the impact of an elaborated peer assessment role where students provided feedback and graded each other's work. 2) Results from the t-test showed that the treatment group who received back-feedback performed better on metacognitive awareness, performance on final projects, and attitude towards peer assessment compared to the control group. 3) Providing feedback improved students' understanding of course content and their own work more than just receiving grades from peers.

1. The impact of an
elaborated assessee’s
role in peer assessment

2. Presented by
Maham Mudassar
Amna Raja
Hadia Tayyab
Hammad Aslam

3. •Introduction
•Relation to the literature
•Methodology
•Results

4. Introduction

5. WHAT IS PEER
ASSESSMENT?
Peer assessment is the
assessment of students
work by another student. It
might be used for grading
purpose or formative
feedback.

6. Why do we need it?
• To give others useful feedback and
hints on how they can improve their
work.
• To help ourselves understand more
how our work is marked and reflect on
our own work.
• To get ideas on how to improve our
own work.

7. Cont…..
• The ability to engage in critical
partnerships, is something
which needs to be developed.
• Peer assessment and peer
support allow for discussion to
take place. This appears to
help students to develop skills
in writing and in peer support.

8. What has prompted this
study?
The primary purpose of this research is
to:-
• Give answers to questions
• To solve problems
• To explore phenomena
• To establish facts, principles and laws
• To add new knowledge to existing

9. Current state of
knowledge
• Self and peer-assessment are being
used increasingly in higher education,
to help assign grades to student’s
work and to help students to learn
more effectively.
• However, in spite of this trend there is
little in the published literature on how
students view these methods.

10. Why is peer
assessment
important?
• Holds learner accountable for
preparation and team contribution.
• Reinforces learning.
• Opportunity to get the feedback from
peers.
• Enhances our communication and
interpersonal skills.

11. What do we learn ?
• We are able to develop deep
understanding.
• We are able to learn from others
success.
• We can learn from others mistakes.
• Learning is enhanced by assessing in
different ways.

12. Relation to
the literature

13. Relation to the literature
• Studies show that peer grading enhances
student learning.
• Students become more reflective and their
learning outcomes improve when they are
involved in marking (Stefani 1994).
• Peer feedback is more effective than grading in
peer assessment (Liu and Carless 2006).
• Peer feedback can improve the learning of both
assessors and assessees by sharpening the
critical thinking skills of the assessors and by
providing timely feedback to the assessee’s
(Lucking 2008).

14. Cont……
• When assessors give cognitive feedback
they summarize arguments, identify
problems, offer solutions, and explicate
comments (Hattie 2007).
• High school students report that online
positive feedback significantly contributes to
their learning (Tsai 2007).

15. Methodology

16. APPROACH
This study reports the effects of
peer assessment, in the form of
peer grading and peer feedback,
on students learning.

17. Methods
• A total of 82 students were selected
• Two groups were made (n1=40) and
(n2=42)
• One group was assigned as treatment
group (presence of back–feedback)
• Other one was assigned as control group
(absence of back feedback form)
• Hypothesis was taken.
• T-test was done.

18. Technique
• Peer-feedback form was developed by
the researcher.
• Back-feedback form was developed by
researcher.
• Learners were trained on doing
assessment.
• Both groups were given Peer-
feedback forms.
• Only treatment group receive Back-
feedback form.

20. Hypothesis
We assume that treatment
group perform better than
control group.

21. t-test
t-test compares the actual difference
between two means in relation to the
variation in the data (expressed as the
standard deviation of the difference
between the means).
1-We need to construct a null hypothesis.
2-List the data for samples.
3-Record the number (n).
4-Calculate mean of each sample.
5-Calculate standard deviation.

22. Null Hypothesis
There is no difference in the
performance of treatment
group and the control group.

23. Analysis
• T-test was done to compare the
levels of:-
1- Metacognitive awareness
2-Performance
3- Attitude
• The results were compared of
treatment group and control group.

24. Results

25. t-value
• If your t-value has probability
(p<0.05) than your null hypothesis
is rejected and your data is
correct.
• If your t-value has (p>0.05) so
your null hypothesis is correct and
your data is inaccurate.

26. Preliminary Analysis
Only three dependent variables
were measured using t-test:-
1.Attitude
2.Metacognitive awareness
3.performance

27. Descriptive statistics for each measurement

28. Control group Treatment group

29. Control group
before
after

30. Treatment group
after

31. Metacognitive
Awareness
• An independent t-test sample.
• Alpha level/(probability)p< 0.05
• Treatment group reported more
metacognitive awareness in learning
than the control group.
• (t[80] = 3.49, p < 0.05)

32. Performance
The result indicated that the students
who were in the treatment showed
better performance in making a final
concept map than the students in the
control group.

33. Attitude
• Treatment group attitude towards peer
assessment was better than that of
control group.
• Out of 82 students only 68 provided
opinion about peer assessment.
• ‘the peer assessment was fun and
easy’
• Critical and positive feedback

35. Result
Our null hypothesis is rejected as
probability is less than 0.05 so our
assumption is correct that
treatment group performs better
than control group.

36. Affects of peer
assessment
• By filling out the Back-Feedback
Form, students paid more attention in
planning their projects and
assignments
• They learnt and understood much
better than control group students.

37. Understandings
• Those who gave more feedback gained
more from the project process.
• Grading improved assessor’s
understanding and their own
performance individually.
• It is quite reasonable that identifying
problems and making suggestions
leads assessors to engage in cognitive
and logical activities.
• They gained knowledge and
understanding in their own projects by
assessing the projects of peers.

38. Implications and Future
study
• Research should include more
qualitative data.
• Assessment should be more
interactive.

39. Question arises
1. Are peer grading activities
related to the quality of the
final project?
2. Are different types of affective
feedback related to the quality
of the final projects for both
assessors and assessees?