JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for WEBPA Archives


WEBPA Archives

WEBPA Archives


WEBPA@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

WEBPA Home

WEBPA Home

WEBPA  December 2008

WEBPA December 2008

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Selfishness?

From:

Paul A Chin <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Paul A Chin <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:43:11 -0000

Content-Type:

multipart/mixed

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (132 lines) , Peer assessment_scoring example.pdf (132 lines) , Unknown Name (4 lines)

The algorithm used in WebPA is similar to the one published by Li in
2001. When I introduce students to peer assessment I make the process
clear and make an example marking available (attached) so they can see
how the algorithm cuts out this potential bias - because it can work
both ways - with a generous student ending up with a lower mark for
themselves.

As Peter says, it isn't perfect and judgement comes in somewhere. For
me, I get students to document their activities so that I can refer to
the evidence in case of dispute or 'strange' marking habits. Works fine
for me and only one contested mark in five years which was subsequently
withdrawn once I read that they never attended meetings or did any
work...

I think there is also a logged request for a range of algorithms to be
available, since there is more than one way to divide marks, it just
depends on your preference.

Regards

Paul

Li, L. K. Y. (2001). Some Refinements on Peer Assessment of Group
Projects. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Carfax Publishing
Company. 26: 5-18.



-----Original Message-----
From: WebPA Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter
Willmot
Sent: 08 December 2008 12:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Selfishness?

Hi

This is the dilemma of self and peer assessment - should you give them
control (when control inevitably leaves it open to this kind of abuse.
Having had experience of WebPA for over 10 years, here is my take on it
in bullet form.

1) Using Web-PA you only allow students partial control - because you
can check (and query if necessary all results that you think are
erroneous after the marking is submitted). Normally very little, if any
editing is required.
2) When I introduce Web-PA I always make it clear that marking is
anonymous except that the only other person who will see the detailed
breakdown is ME! I am careful to advise them that their marks are likely
to be monitored.
3) It is true that weak students generally overplay their contribution
but it is also just as true that other members of a team with a weak
student tend to be over-critical of him/her and mark them perhaps lower
than is justified.  The scenario you paint is rare in my experience and
could probably be picked up prior to final publication.
4) There is an academic case that students undergoing teamwork have a
responsibility for the cohesion of the team. t Hence a mechanism for
moderating the overoptimistic or downright inaccurate scores of a weak
student and for the potentially vindictive scores of peer members is a
good thing and Web-Pa effectively provides that through self and peer
assessment.
5) The main drivers for this imperfect, yet sound solution are - a) to
give the students responsibility and make them think about what is good
and bad work b) I have not yet found a better solution to group marking
and c) there is much evidence that the students who use this system and
generally more content than with other systems.

Have a look at my paper on this at
http://www.engsc.ac.uk/journal/index.php/ee/issue/view/21

At the end of the day, the decision is yours.

Regards

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: WebPA Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nicola
Wilkinson
Sent: 08 December 2008 11:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Selfishness?

I have received an email from Mike asking about selfishness within
WebPA. Can anyone help to answer his question (see the email text below)

Thanks
Nic

--------------------------------------------
Nicola Wilkinson
eLearning Systems Developer
WebPA Project, engCETL

Web: http://webpaproject.lboro.ac.uk/
JISCmail: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/webpa.html
Project Blog: http://webpa-tec.blogspot.com/
--------------------------------------------

Hi there.

I'm very interested in the WebPA system but I have been looking over the
documentation and I can't see any way of preventing students from
selfishly
manipulating marks to boost there own scores. Is there a mechanism that
you
haven't explained in the demonstrations, or is the only solution to
prevent
students from assessing themselves (something I don't want to do)?

What I mean is, say a report for a 4-person group got 80%, and I had
decided to use a 40% PA weighting. Therefore, each student effectively
controls a 10% stake of their 80% mark. What is to prevent one of them
from
marking themselves 5/5 on every criterion and their peers 1/5? Assuming
the
other scores were completely even, this would give them a webPA score of
1.375. 1.375 x 40% = 55%, giving a total score for the selfish student
of
95% and scores for the others of 0.875 x 40% + 40% = 75%. Essentially,
the
selfish student has taken 5% from each of the others. Is there a flag to
alert the assessor of this? In this example it would be fairly obvious,
but
I imagine that when the other numbers vary it would be easy to miss
that.

Thanks,

Mike



***************************************************************************************** To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.html *****************************************************************************************

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager