Discussion and student feedback

This trial of CAPA in engineering modules was intended to gather information on the benefits to staff and students and on the difficulties in implementing an automated system within the MLE. These objectives were both met, and very positive feedback was received from students on their experiences using CAPA. It was also clear that virtually everyone registered for the first year module had become far more conversant with the capabilities of the MLE and student portal than in previous years. This is an important outcome, as the final piece of coursework in this design module was a group project where private folders on the MLE are used to exchange files, to communicate between group members and with the tutors, and to arrange meetings. In previous years, overall success in the module could be loosely correlated with frequency of the use of the MLE as a communication vehicle for the design group.

It became abundantly clear, however, that ad hoc programs and macros to perform tasks such as anonymizing the Microsoft Word documents submitted by students could not be interfaced with the secure MLE except through very significant manual intervention. For instance, whilst one can email an essay template with uniform document properties, there was no simple system to ensure that the template was used and returned. Equally, students often used personalized headers and footers, despite clear guidelines on essay layout. The system of randomly allocating essays to students for marking was another difficult process to automate and required extracting the files from the MLE, working on them and then loading them back onto the student portal.

The solution to this problem is to drive the e-learning agenda of the University towards software development of the MLE to support CAPA. This is likely to be a two year project involving several software development staff, and has already taken around two years to motivate and demonstrate the effectiveness of the experience in student learning.

With the present computer systems, the benefits to the staff are indirect, in the form of students who are better equipped to use IT systems, and who can exercise critical self-reflection in essays for other modules. The lecturer of the engineering management group reported that the requirement to provide students with the explicit and detailed marking criteria necessary for peer assessment had made him reconsider the structure of assignments he set on other programs. The direct time benefits are marginal, although once a suitable system and assessment resources are developed, some 75% of marking time might be saved (based on sampling around 25% of submitted essays).

The feedback provided by the peer markers to individual students was generally very constructive, apposite and supportive. Certain examples could not have been bettered by an academic member of staff, and also provide evidence that the University support resources have been properly made known to, and used by, many first year students.

The following quote shows one feedback comment: "The report starts off with a good definition of your initial thoughts about the two terms, engineering and design. You have shown well what you have learnt in the last few weeks and how your understanding has improved. Your level of grammar and spelling is to a good standard but I would suggest spreading out your work a little more. It can be very hard going and it becomes very easy to lose interest when you have to read large blocks of text. Your references were a little vague and could have been expanded. The university provides a lot of help notes on such things as quoting references properly. A large percentage of the marks you did lose were due to the fact that you didn't cover the areas on which you were going to be marked on. The best way to overcome this in the future is when writing a report to always know what you are writing, and does that answer the question you were given. And when possible have a copy of the mark scheme with you so you know that you have covered everything which you will be marked on. Overall a good report and you have shown a good potential for the future."

An excellent example of a 'criticism sandwich' is seen in the feedback comment: "A good solid essay with fantastic layout and structure. A few points: some of the issues were touched upon but not fully discussed such as modules taken and the environmental issues, the essay was on the short side and had much room to elaborate on. English and grammar were a little dodgy in places but otherwise a good essay."

A feedback form was emailed to the students after the exercise and their feedback was uniformly positive. Some of the questions asked are given below with typical verbatim responses received from students. The percentage given indicates positive (Yes) responses and n is the number of responses received.

1. Did you learn anything from marking someone else's work?

(88% Yes, n = 101)

-How important it is to read through the assignment criteria before beginning

-What a good and bad essay looks like

-I have learnt how to structure an essay and which type of language to use to build it

-It has given me the idea on how to check my own essay for mistakes next time

-The level of my peers, and my own faults

2. (Why) Do you think this peer assessment exercise will help you to write better reports in the future?

(72% Yes, n = 101)

-I think I will have a different insight into writing reports

-Because I will consider the person reading it, the flow, etc.

-The process led to me reassess my own essay and made me notice my own mistakes

-Hopefully, I will write them clearer so that they are easier to mark

3. What did you like best about doing this peer assessment?

-It was fun!!

-Was different and interesting

-Quick, educational

-Quick good feedback

-I mostly liked the fact that I was given the opportunity to put myself in the position of a tutor, and see how the marking process is carried out

-Getting other students' views on my work

-That it was all electronic

4. What did you like least about doing this peer assessment and how might it be improved?

-Reading them all and having to give some bad marks to students. Although I thought they were justified

-Found it difficult to give students a bad mark (even if deserved) as we are all in the same boat and I felt bad 'failing' a student

-Classmates might not understand how to mark and assess properly

-The same thing I don't like about all coursework, the fact that it's coursework. But I don't think the peer assessment can be improved really

-It is difficult to criticize at the best of times. Fear of responsibility as a nonexpert. It may not be objective enough

5. Would you prefer a peer-assessed assignment to a tutor-marked assignment?

(30% Yes, n = 99)

As the positive responses to questions 1 and 2 far outweigh the negative ones, it is interesting to note that only 30% of the respondents would prefer a peer-assessed assignment to one assessed by tutors. There are hence issues of perception which must be addressed before wider implementation of CAPA with first year engineering undergraduates. The students on the engineering management module were more supportive of peer assessment.

اخر الاخبار

اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة

جولة تفقدية لمتابعة خطة تنظيم مداخل المعزّين المشاركين في عزاء ركضة طويريج

لتعزيز التعاون الأكاديمي والبحثي.. جامعة الكفيل توقع اتفاقيتي توأمة مع جامعتين عراقيتين

المجمَع العلميّ يواصل إقامة مجلسه العزائي بذكرى شهادة الإمام الحسين (عليه السلام) في النجف الأشرف

قسم حفظ النظام يواصل تنفيذ خطته لتنظيم سير المواكب والزائرين في شهر المحرم

المزيد

الآخبار الصحية

لهذا السبب.. إغلاق 25 مركزًا لعلاج الإدمان في مصر ؟

خلافا للاعتقاد الشائع.. علماء يكشفون أسرار بذور البطيخ ؟!

هذا ما يحدث لجسمك عند تناولك الطماطم بانتظام !

تعرف على أطعمة تسرّع "تعافي الجسم" من حروق الشمس

المزيد

الآخبار التكنلوجية

الثلوج تغطي الصحراء الأكثر جفافا في العالم!

بتلسكوب "ألما".. التقاط صورا غير مسبوقة لبدايات الكون !

هل هاتفك مراقب؟.. 5 علامات خطيرة تكشف التجسس عليك

دبي تطلق أول رحلة تجريبية للتاكسي الجوي

المزيد

مواضيع ذات صلة

Stage 2: Determining causal relationships between previous academic qualifications, age, gender, motivation and ILP scores Preliminary analysis Method

Development of Revised Tool

Internal Consistency and Split-half Reliability of Existing Factors

Results, Analysis and Discussion Evaluation of the Existing Tool

Stage 1: Evaluating the reliability, stability and validity of the ILP questionnaire Method

Mapping Self-Assessment to Achievement

Introducing Computer-Aided Peer Assessment (CAPA) in Engineering Conclusions

Implementation and methodology

Introducing CAPA in engineering

Introducing Computer-Aided Peer Assessment (CAPA) in Engineering

Appendix 3 Assessment form developed and used by students (Rating Checklist)

Appendix 2 Focus group meeting question list