Peer Assessment and Self-assessment: Effective Learning Tools in Higher Education.

When used appropriately, self- and peer-assessment are very effective learning tools. In the present work, instructor formative assessment and feedback, self-assessment (SA), and peer-assessment (PA) have been compared. During the first part of a semester, the students followed a continuous formative assessment. Subsequently, they were divided into two subgroups based on similar performances. One subgroup performed SAs, and the other followedPAduring the last part of the course. The performances of the two groups in solving problems were compared. Results suggest that PA is a more effective learning tool than SA, and both are more effective than instructor formative assessment. However, a survey that was conducted at the end of the experiment showed higher student confidence in instructor assessment than in PA. The students recognized the usefulness of acting as peer assessors, but believed that SA helped them more than PA.

Self and peer review in dance classes using personal video feedback

Many forms of formative feedback are used in dance training to refine the dancer’s spatial and kinaesthetic awareness in order that the dancer’s sensorimotor intentions and observable danced outcomes might converge. This paper documents the use of smartphones to record and playback movement sequences in ballet and contemporary technique classes. Peers in pairs took turns filming one another and then analysing the playback. This provided immediate visual feedback of the movement sequence as performed by each dancer. This immediacy facilitated the dancer’s capacity to associate what they felt as they were dancing with what they looked like during the dance. The often-dissonant realities of self-perception and perception by others were thus guided towards harmony, generating improved performance and knowledge relating to dance technique. An approach is offered for potential development of peer review activities to support summative progressive assessment in dance technique training.

Verifying a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM): A reality check of the model using data derived from three universities

Australian higher education institutions (HEIs) have entered a new phase of regulation and accreditation which includes performance-based funding relating to the participation and retention of students from social and cultural groups previously underrepresented in higher education. However, in addressing these priorities, it is critical that HEIs do not further disadvantage students from certain groups by identifying them for attention because of their social or cultural backgrounds, circumstances which are largely beyond the control of students. In response, many HEIs are focusing effort on university-wide approaches to enhancing the student experience because such approaches will enhance the engagement, success and retention of all students, and in doing so, particularly benefit those students who come from underrepresented groups. Measuring and benchmarking student experiences and engagement that arise from these efforts is well supported by extensive collections of student experience survey data. However no comparable instrument exists that measures the capability of institutions to influence and/or enhance student experiences where capability is an indication of how well an organisational process does what it is designed to do (Rosemann & de Bruin, 2005). We have proposed that the concept of a maturity model (Marshall, 2010; Paulk, 1999) may be useful as a way of assessing the capability of HEIs to provide and implement student engagement, success and retention activities and we are currently articulating a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM), (Clarke, Nelson & Stoodley, 2012; Nelson, Clarke & Stoodley, 2012). Our research aims to address the current gap by facilitating the development of an SESR-MM instrument that aims (i) to enable institutions to assess the capability of their current student engagement and retention programs and strategies to influence and respond to student experiences within the institution; and (ii) to provide institutions with the opportunity to understand various practices across the sector with a view to further improving programs and practices relevant to their context. Our research extends the generational approach which has been useful in considering the evolutionary nature of the first year experience (FYE) (Wilson, 2009). Three generations have been identified and explored: First generation approaches that focus on co-curricular strategies (e.g. orientation and peer programs); Second generation approaches that focus on curriculum (e.g. pedagogy, curriculum design, and learning and teaching practice); and third generation approaches—also referred to as transition pedagogy—that focus on the production of an institution-wide integrated holistic intentional blend of curricular and co-curricular activities (Kift, Nelson & Clarke, 2010). Our research also moves beyond assessments of students’ experiences to focus on assessing institutional processes and their capability to influence student engagement. In essence, we propose to develop and use the maturity model concept to produce an instrument that will indicate the capability of HEIs to manage and improve student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. The issues explored in this workshop are (i) whether the maturity model concept can be usefully applied to provide a measure of institutional capability for SESR; (ii) whether the SESR-MM can be used to assess the maturity of a particular set of institutional practices; and (iii) whether a collective assessment of an institution’s SESR capabilities can provide an indication of the maturity of the institution’s SESR activities. The workshop will be approached in three stages. Firstly, participants will be introduced to the key characteristics of maturity models, followed by a discussion of the SESR-MM and the processes involved in its development. Secondly, participants will be provided with resources to facilitate the development of a maturity model and an assessment instrument for a range of institutional processes and related practices. In the final stage of the workshop, participants will “assess” the capability of these practices to provide a collective assessment of the maturity of these processes. References Australian Council for Educational Research. (n.d.). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/research/ausse/background Clarke, J., Nelson, K., & Stoodley, I. (2012, July). The Maturity Model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention: New horizon or false dawn? A Nuts & Bolts presentation at the 15th International Conference on the First Year in Higher Education, “New Horizons,” Brisbane, Australia. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (n.d.). The University Experience Survey. Advancing quality in higher education information sheet. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/Documents/University_Experience_Survey.pdf Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy - a third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1-20. Marshall, S. (2010). A quality framework for continuous improvement of e-Learning: The e-Learning Maturity Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 143-166. Nelson, K., Clarke, J., & Stoodley, I. (2012). An exploration of the Maturity Model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement. A work in progress. Submitted for publication. Paulk, M. (1999). Using the Software CMM with good judgment, ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(3), 19-29. Wilson, K. (2009, June–July). The impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Keynote address presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, “Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year as Foundation,” Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/ppts/Keithia_Wilson_paper.pdf

Student self-assessment a feedback seeking strategy through competence evaluation

There is a body of literature that suggests that student self-assessment is a main goal in higher education (Boud et al., 1995; Tan, 2008); moreover new forms of work organization require a high level of skills and competences. The efforts to deal with competence gaps could be developed at many levels, such as employers, educational institutions, individuals and public agents. Employers could put into practice competence development programs to moderate these gaps. Educational institutions can restructure the curriculum to support students in attaining the competences that are essential in the labour market. Individuals themselves may deploy their resources (time and money) in general or specific competence training. Further, government agencies could fund competence promotion programs. Such challenges for education drive change in learning curricula and method, to properly include the competences required for developing global workers who can move beyond basic competence, to enhanced flexibility and adaptability. In performance assessment methods, there is a shift from the traditional exam-based assessments to more innovative task assessment, which considers performance in multiple different tasks carry out by students. ICTs make it technologically feasible to carry out a complete and complex selfassessment of competences, which provides immediate results to students or other recipients. In the case of students, the evaluation of competences is relevant as developing competences is part - if not all - of the objectives of education. Therefore, it is an important element of the quality of educational organizations (e.g., universities), and of their organizational success. Further, educational organizations may put special emphasis on some differentiating competences, which can be a means of positioning and differentiation from competitors. Competence assessment is an instrument to make students conscious of their strengths and weaknesses, leading to higher motivation to develop their own learning career

Using online peer assessment tools to provide feedback and promote learning

A set of slides used for the RAP SIG event on 19 Jan 2017

The maturity model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention : new horizon or false dawn?

While the engagement, success and retention of first year students are ongoing issues in higher education, they are currently of considerable and increasing importance as the pressures on teaching and learning from the new standards framework and performance funding intensifies. This Nuts & Bolts presentation introduces the concept of a maturity model and its application to the assessment of the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention. Participants will be provided with (a) a concise description of the concept and features of a maturity model; and (b) the opportunity to explore the potential application of maturity models (i) to the management of student engagement and retention programs and strategies within an institution and (ii) to the improvement of these features by benchmarking across the sector.

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in higher education institutions [Final Report]

The perennial issues of student engagement, success and retention (SESR) in higher education continue to attract attention as key indicators of learning and teaching quality. This project aimed to establish and provide a holistic framework that would allow higher education institutions (HEIs) manage and improve their student engagement and retention strategies and programs. The framework and main project deliverable is a Maturity Model (MM) for Student Engagement, Success and Retention (SESR-MM). The project involved three Australian universities with experience and reputations in SESR activities: Queensland University of Technology (lead institution), the University of Queensland and Griffith University, working cooperatively to develop and trial the project deliverables. Project findings suggest that the SESR-MM has the potential to positively transform the holistic—academic, social and personal—engagement experiences of students in Australian universities, and that the SESR-MM is a useful mechanism for sharing good practice and improving programs designed to enhance the student experience.

Feedback on student performance in the workplace: The role of workplace supervisors

This chapter highlights the im portance of feedback in work - integrated learning (WIL) , the key role of workplace supervisors, and the importance of continuous improvement in systems to support feedback processes. The paper proposes a definition of feedback and formative feedback, as well as approaches for providing industry feedback in W I L . It further reports on a case analysis based on workplace supervisors providing feedback to students in engineering and urban development , yielding certain insights into student pe rformance in the workplace, and m ore importantly, hi ghlighting the need to enhance the use of feedback processes. This is requir ed in a context where delivering feedback in WIL is generally acknowledge d to be complex, and where the role of the industry supervisor in appraising the performance of the student in the workplace needs to be very c learly defined in order for supervisor s ’ feedback to have optimal impact. F eedback in WIL i s set against the bac kdrop of recognizing the importance and complexity of stakeholder engagement in WIL in general, and the intricacy associated with the provision of feedback from industry supervisors in particular. Student self - assessment is briefly considered as a fu rther dimension of their participation in providing feedback on their own performance in the workplace . ( Asia - Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, Special Issue, 2014, 15 (3 ), 241 - 25 2

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in higher education institutions

This poster summarises the outcomes of a national project to develop and provide a holistic framework consisting of a series of sequential and increasingly sophisticated stages that will allow higher education institutions (HEIs) to manage and improve their student engagement and retention strategies/programs.

Peer Rating for Feedback in Group Projects

The National Student Survey (NSS) in the UK has since 2005 questioned final year
undergraduate students on a broad range of issues relating to their university experience.
Across disciplines and universities students have expressed least satisfaction in the areas of
assessment and feedback. In response to these results many educational practitioners have
reviewed and revised their procedures and the UK Higher Education Academy (HEA) has
produced guidelines of best practice to assist academics in improving these specific areas.
The Product Design and Development (PDD) degree at Queen’s University Belfast is
structured with an integrated curriculum with group Design Build Test (DBT) projects as the
core of each year of the undergraduate programme. Based on the CDIO syllabus and
standards the overall learning outcomes for the programme are defined and developed in a
staged manner, guided by Bloom’s taxonomy of learning domains.
Feedback in group DBT projects, especially in relation to the development of personal and
professional skills, represents a different challenge to that of individual assignment feedback.
A review of best practice was carried out to establish techniques which could be applied to
the particular context of the PDD degree without modification and also to identify areas
where a different approach would need to be applied.
A revised procedure was then developed which utilised the structure of the PDD degree to
provide a mechanism for enhanced feedback in group project work, while at the same time
increasing student development of self and peer evaluation skills. Key to this improvement
was the separation of peer ratings from assessment in the perception of the students and the
introduction of more frequent face to face feedback interviews.
This paper details the new procedures developed and additional issues which have been
raised and addressed, with reference to the published literature, during 3 years of operation.

Using multimedia and peer assessment to promote collaborative e-learning

Collaborative e-learning is increasingly appealing as a pedagogical approach that can positively affect student learning. We propose a didactical model that integrates multimedia with collaborative tools and peer assessment to foster collaborative e-learning. In this paper, we explain it and present the results of its application to the “International Seminars on Materials Science” online course. The proposed didactical model consists of five educational activities. In the first three, students review the multimedia resources proposed by the teacher in collaboration with their classmates. Then, in the last two activities, they create their own multimedia resources and assess those created by their classmates. These activities foster communication and collaboration among students and their ability to use and create multimedia resources. Our purpose is to encourage the creativity, motivation, and dynamism of the learning process for both teachers and students.

The place of higher education institutions in assessing student engagement, success and retention : a maturity model to guide practice

The perennial issues of student engagement, success and retention in higher education continue to attract attention as the salience of teaching and learning funding and performance measures has increased. This paper addresses the question of the responsibility or place of higher education institutions (HEIs) for initiating, planning, managing and evaluating their student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. An evaluation of the current situation indicates the need for a sophisticated approach to assessing the ability of HEIs to proactively design programs and practices that enhance student engagement. An approach—the Student Engagement Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM)—is proposed and its development, current status, and relationship with and possible use in benchmarking are discussed.