Accuracy of students' self‐assessment and their beliefs about its utility

Abstract

The purpose of the two studies presented here was to evaluate the accuracy of students' self-assessment ability, to examine whether this ability improves over time and to investigate whether self-assessment is more accurate if students believe that it contributes to improving learning. To that end, the accuracy of the self-assessments of 3588 first-year students enrolled in a post-secondary institution was studied throughout a semester during which each student made approximately 80 self-assessments about his or her own learning process. These self-assessments were then compared with multiple judgements by peers and tutors. The overall correlations between the scores of self-, peer and tutor assessments suggest weak to moderate accuracy of student self-assessment ability. The findings also reveal an ability effect; students judged as more academically competent were able to self-assess with higher accuracy than their less competent peers. Comparing the accuracy of student self-assessment averaged over four consecutive periods indicates that the accuracy does not improve over time. In a second study, a questionnaire aimed at eliciting student's beliefs about the effects of self-assessment on their learning was administered to 936 first-year students. Based on their responses, sub-groups of students were identified: those who either believed in the usefulness of self-assessment or did not. Results suggest that there is no significant association between student beliefs about the utility of selfassessment and the accuracy of their self-assessments.

Self- and Peer-Assessment: Evidence from the Accounting and Finance Discipline

“…These authors conclude that the correlation between an actual and an estimated score is not a very useful indicator of SA accuracy because it quantifies an aspect that is distinct from those summarized in the bias and deviation measures. In one of the few studies conducted in accounting education, Larres, Ballantine and Whittington (2003) Other studies have assessed the accuracy of both SA and PA compared to TA by means of correlation coefficients (e.g., Longhurst and Norton, 1997;Papinczak et al, 2007;Lew, Alwis and Schmidt, 2010) but have not always found it to be a very useful indicator for accuracy 6 (Fitzgerald, White and Gruppen, 2003). For example, Longhurst and Norton (1997) compare SA to TA for second-year undergraduate psychology students; they find a significant positive correlation (r = 0.43) between student and tutor grades.…”

“…However, the PA appears to be slightly more accurate, with peer-average scores correlating moderately with tutor ratings (initially: r = 0.40); they also find that the correlation improves over time (r = 0.60). Lew, Alwis and Schmidt (2010) The validity of the assessment is distinct from its accuracy and is defined as 'the extent to which any instrument measures what it is intended to measure' (Carmines and Zeller, 1991, p. 17). There are three common types of validity: (i) criterion (ii) content and (iii) construct.…”

“…Fitzgerald, White and Gruppen, 2003;Larres, Ballantine and Whittington, 2003;Freeman, 1995;Longhurst and Norton, 1997;Papinczak et al, 2007;Lew, Alwis and Schmidt, 2010). For example, Fitzgerald, White and Gruppen (2003) contrast students' own estimated performance (SA) with their actual performance (TA), to examine the stability of SA accuracy over time for undergraduate medical students.…”

“…Although the existing SA and PA literature is extensive and covers many disciplines such as medicine, dentistry and foreign languages (e.g., Stefani, 1994;Orsmond, Merry and Reiling, 1996;Longhurst and Norton,1997;Fitzgerald, White and Gruppen, 2003;Cho, Schunn and Wilson, 2006;Lindblom-ylanne, Pihlajamaki and Kotkas, 2006;Evans, Leeson and Petrie, 2007;Papinczak et al, 2007;Wen and Tsai, 2008;Matsuno, 2009;De Grez, Valcke and Berings, 2010;Lew, Alwis and Schmidt, 2010;Liang and Tsai, 2010), it has produced mixed results about the accuracy and construct validity of SA and PA. Therefore, this area of research remains a viable topic of investigation.…”

“…Both self-assessment (SA) and peer-assessment (PA) are considered to be useful tools in the development of lifelong learning, as they help promote a wide range of transferable skills (Boud and Lublin, 1983;Stefani, 1994). It is argued that SA, (the ability of learners to assess and evaluate their own work) enables students to monitor, direct and regulate their actions towards the goals of information acquisition, increased expertise and self-improvement (Lew, Alwis and Schmidt, 2010). It has also been suggested that higher education should build on students' existing abilities to assess their own work and generate their own feedback (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).…”