Overview of Group Peer Assessment (Ultra)

Peer assessment can be used as part of a multifaceted approach to improve group work. Please learn more about using digital tools in peer assessment.

The PETS (Proactively Ensuring Team Success), a structured process, includes a number of inter-related actions:

purposeful allocation of students to teams based on a team skills inventory and/or prior knowledge of student attributes
student self-assessment of teamwork attributes
explicit student skill development in team dynamics using classroom learning, mentoring and assessment
- Resource: Working in Teams: A Practical Guide
tailored project features and assessment
individual and team structured reflection
anonymous peer evaluation and assessment of team members
team mentoring and monitoring

Reference: Working in Teams: A Practical Guide

Kavanagh, L., Harrison, J., Cokley, J., and Neil, D. (2010) Proactively Ensuring Team Success: A guide to effective student project teams in higher education, Instructors Manual

Buddycheck

This is the centrally supported tool for all peer evaluation at UQ, during and/or following groupwork. When using the Buddycheck tool you need to determine whether:

you will use the Likert or PAF question type
the assessment will be formative or summative
if the assessment is formative, what interventions you will put in place to support dysfunctional groups
the results will be used to adjust group marks or only as information.

You will also consider:

moderation of the student responses.
how to clearly explain the peer assessment process and moderation process to students and document it in the Course Profile.

Things to Consider

When using UQ's peer assessment tool - Buddycheck - you need to determine whether:

you will use the Likert scale or points division question type
the assessment will be formative or summative
if the assessment is formative, what interventions you will put in place to support dysfunctional groups
the results will be used to adjust group marks, as raw scores added to the group marks, or only as information.

You will also consider:

a moderation process of the student responses
how to clearly explain the peer assessment process and moderation process to students and document it in the Course Profile.

Likert scale option

With the Likert option students evaluate peers' contribution to group work by responding to statements using a Likert scale. The tool will calculate the Average Score each student receives from all other group members for all criteria.

The tool facilitates the moderation of results to remove unjustified scores and recalculates the Average Score.

Warning: It is recommended that results are moderated if they are going to be used for summative assessment.

Points division option

With the Divided points option students are asked to evaluate peers' individual contributions to the group work by splitting 100 marks between the members of the group, including themselves for the criteria set by the course coordinator.

The tool facilitates the moderation of results to remove unjustified scores and recalculates the PAF.

Warning: It is recommended that results are moderated if they are going to be used for summative assessment.

Example: Use of the adjustment factor

For each student, an adjustment factor (formerly known as PAF - Peer Assessment Factor) is calculated. After the student responses have been moderated, the adjustment factor can be used to re-calculate individual student assignment marks based on their peers' evaluation of their contribution to the group assignment.

i.e. If the group assignment receives a mark of 80 out of 100 and students receive adjustment factors of

Student 1: 0.85
Student 2: 1.00
Student 3: 1.05
Student 4: 0.95
Student 1’s assignment mark = 80 x 0.85 = 68
Student 2’s assignment mark = 80 x 1.00 = 80
Student 3’s assignment mark = 80 x 1.10 = 88
Student 4’s assignment mark = 80 x 0.95 = 76

Warning: The adjustment factor in Buddycheck should only be used to adjust individual students’ results if the process has been clearly explained to students and included in the Course Profile. Moderation of the student responses is essential to ensure that the final adjusted mark accurately represents their performance and contribution to the group. A small minority of students will try to “game” the system to give themselves a higher adjustment factor than is warranted, or potentially to penalise other group members.