Blog Twenty-Eight- Peer Assessment (Group Work Part 4)
Continuing the discussion from the previous three posts, collaboration in math classrooms can be fostered in many ways. Aspects of group work were discussed in detail. Peer assessment is another strategy attempted in classrooms to promote active engagement and critical thinking among students. The strategy involves students reviewing each others’ work and providing feedback based on a given criteria (which can be as loose or as structured as the teacher would like). This can be done in the form of grades given by students to others, or being asked by the instructor to provide constructive feedback. The essence of peer assessment is that students have the opportunity to look over and discuss work that is not their own and also become familiar with the criteria used to evaluate different levels of performance. In that sense, the definition can be quite broad as long as it captures the general point of having students critique one another’s work in a helpful manner.
The advantages of peer assessment in comparison to, for example, having a teacher grade and give feedback may be unclear at first. It is expected that an instructor who likely knows the material in more depth than most of the students would provide the best feedback. However, having students assess one another’s work is fundamentally different in the dynamics of how feedback is given. Students have likely completed the assignments themselves and applied their own thought processes, so they can offer unique insights and perspectives that the instructor may have overlooked. Looking over their peers’ works also gives them an opportunity to explore the thought processes of others, which can deepen their own understanding of the concepts. Being exposed to the different approaches and perspectives of their classmates can help students develop more flexible and creative problem-solving abilities. This can be said in the context of the lesson topic itself and also in the context of others’ works serving as a model for how to articulate, formulate and organize responses.
Yet, peer assessment heavily depends on student effort. Some students may receive low-quality, general feedback, while others may receive actionable, specific, and helpful feedback, causing inequities in the learning process. An instructor would likely have more standardized feedback in relation to all the students, but peer assessments are less predictable and can vary greatly in their quality and constructiveness. This lack of reliability can end up hurting students if they do not receive the proper feedback they need, so the teacher would need to take steps to ensure peer assessments are sufficiently meaningful and valuable to the learning process. Students may also hold the opinion of peer feedback as less credible than that of the teacher, causing them to be less likely to implement it into their work compared to if it was given by instructors. Additionally, students may feel uncomfortable providing critical feedback to their peers, and this discomfort can limit the effectiveness of the peer assessment process. Student relationships play a large role in how they interact with others, and it is unrealistic to assume that in an academic setting, they would cease to exist.
The primary goal of assessment would often be to identify areas for improvement and support student learning. Peer assessment can hypothetically accomplish this, but many issues arise through its actual implementation in a realistic classroom setting, often coming from the variability of student engagement and the potential for interpersonal dynamics to influence the review process. Overall, peer assessment can be a valuable tool in math classrooms, but it requires careful implementation and oversight by the teacher to mitigate potential drawbacks and ensure students receive high-quality, constructive feedback that supports their learning.
