Increasing anonymity in peer assessment by using classroom response technology within face-to-face higher education

Abstract

Peer assessment is becoming more popular in higher education, however it often goes together with undesirable social effects like peer pressure and favoritism, especially when students need to evaluate peers in a face-to-face setting. The present study was set up to investigate increased anonymity in peer assessment to counter these undesirable social effects. It was hypothesized that modes of peer assessment that provide an increased anonymity will induce a reduced perception of peer pressure, increased feelings of comfort and more positive attitudes towards peer assessment. Classroom response technology (CRT) was introduced as a tool that enables anonymity. In addition, oral and written feedback was organized to meet the need for feedback. The results show that the proposed peer assessment practice combines the positive attitudes and feelings of comfort related to the anonymous use of CRT with the perceived added value of argumentation in oral and written feedback

What if pupils can assess their peers anonymously? A quasi-experimental study

“…As the interplay of interpersonal variables is inherent to peer assessment practices and this process influences the assessment outcome, it has been stated that decreasing negative social effects such as peer pressure is desirable (Harris & Brown, 2013;Raes et al, 2013;Sung, Chang, Chang, & Yu, 2010). Several theories predict that this decrease can be obtained by making the assessment procedure anonymous, enabling pupils to assess each other without revealing their identity (Ainsworth et al, 2011;Deutsch & Gerard, 1955;Latané, 1981).…”

“…In line with these theories, Howard, Barrett, and Frick (2010) found that students who were anonymous when giving feedback in the context of an asynchronous webforum were approximately five times more likely to provide substantively critical feedback than those whose identities were known to the recipients. Moreover, Raes et al (2013) established that providing anonymity in a face-to-face peer assessment context in higher education is What if pupils can assess their peers anonymously? associated with some interpersonal variables, that is with increased feelings of comfort and more positive attitudes towards peer assessment.…”

“…Raes et al (2013) proposed and investigated the use of classroom response technology (CRT, e.g., the electronic voting system TurningPoint®) to enable pupils to give immediate anonymous feedback even within face-to-face settings and to help students cope with the aforementioned undesirable social effects. A classroom response system is a voting system used in a face-to-face setting to assess students using individual infrared handset transmitters ('clickers'), tablets or mobile phones.…”

“…In the context of this learning approach inspired by social constructivism, this evolution in evaluation entails different innovative forms of assessment like self, peer and co assessment (Fastré, van der Klink, Sluijsmans, & van Merriënboer, 2013;Harris & Brown, 2013;Raes, Vanderhoven, & Schellens, 2013). Yet, both teachers and students need to adjust to these new assessment forms and this is especially the case in assessment practices in which students get the responsibility to evaluate each other, such as peer assessment, and where interpersonal variables might influence the procedure (Van Gennip, Segers, & Tillema, 2009).…”

The opinions of prospective teachers on peer assessment

“…These suggestions are of great importance to provide secrecy of the assessors and also for the validity of the evaluation. An issue that needs good remark is that secrecy is a factor that affects evaluation (Bay, 2011), and using technology in providing secrecy decreases peer pressure (Raes et al, 2015). In addition, giving just one evaluation form to the group is a suggestion that is worth to be considered to prevent tendentiousness.…”