Notes from the Field: Evaluating a Budget-Based Approach to Peer Assessment for Measuring Collaboration Among Learners on Interprofessional Teams

Lockeman, Kelly; Dow, Alan; Randell, Autumn L

doi:10.1177/0163278719826227

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, listing a number of peer evaluation tools helps academics select and implement the tools to identify individual contributions and make the assessment process fair for all members of the group. Some of the self-and peer evaluation tools included it-IWF [82], SPARKPLUS [83], the Peer Assessment System (PAS) [65], the CASNIWF method [84], WebPA [11,52], budget of the point [85], and the web-based and color-coded system [74]. The pros and cons of different approaches to rating individual contributions should be explained to students when peer assessment is introduced [86].…”

Section: Citation Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the research indicates that only close-ended feedback may lead to less reliable and informative feedback. Conversely, open-ended questions allow students to report freely on their observations and opinions of other peers' contributions to the group task [85,94]. A combination of quantitative and qualitative comments in peer evaluations is the best way of capturing students' self-and peer evaluations.…”

Section: Qualitative and Quantitative Questions In Peer Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Holistic Overview of Studies to Improve Group-Based Assessments in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a soaring demand for work-ready graduates who can quickly adapt to an ever-challenging work environment. Group-based assessments have been widely recommended as a means to develop the skills required for the world of work. However, group-based assessments are perceived as challenging for both students and educators. This systematic literature review (SLR), based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), focuses on analyzing and synthesizing the existing literature on group-based assessments. A four-step approach was undertaken in order to conduct this research. The SLR identified 71 relevant articles, analyzed using thematic analysis with the aid of NVivo software. An open coding approach was adopted to generate codes. The validity of the SLR process and the reliability of the research tool were maintained through the use of trustworthiness. The findings identified dominant themes such as self- and peer evaluations, training students for group work assessments, group formation, group size, and the role of academics and technology in facilitating group processes. The outcomes of this review contribute significantly to the design and administration of group-based assessments in higher education by providing academics with practical guidelines to effectively facilitate group-based assessments which fit the purpose.

show abstract

Section: Citation Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Qualitative and Quantitative Questions In Peer Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Holistic Overview of Studies to Improve Group-Based Assessments in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Peer assessment of professionalism in undergraduate medical education

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Fostering professional behaviour has become increasingly important in medical education and non-traditional approaches to assessment of professionalism may offer a more holistic representation of students’ professional behaviour development. Emerging evidence suggests peer assessment may offer potential as an alternative method of professionalism assessment. We introduced peer assessment of professionalism in pre-clerkship phases of undergraduate medical education curriculum at our institution and evaluated suitability of adopting a professional behaviour scale for longitudinal tracking of student development, and student comfort and acceptance of peer assessment. Methods Peer assessment was introduced using a validated professional behaviours scale. Students conducted repeated, longitudinal assessments of their peers from small-group, clinical skills learning activities. An electronic assessment system was used to collect peer assessments, collate and provide reports to students. Student opinions of peer assessment were initially surveyed before introducing the process, confirmatory analyses were conducted of the adopted scale, and students were surveyed to explore satisfaction with the peer assessment process. Results Students across all phases of the curriculum were initially supportive of anonymous peer assessment using small-group learning sessions. Peer scores showed improvement over time, however the magnitude of increase was limited by ceiling effects attributed to the adopted scale. Students agreed that the professional behaviours scale was easy to use and understand, however a majority disagreed that peer assessment improved their understanding of professionalism or was a useful learning experience. Conclusions Peer assessment of professional behaviours does expose students to the process of assessing one’s peers, however the value of such processes at early stages of medical education may not be fully recognized nor appreciated by students. Electronic means for administering peer assessment is feasible for collecting and reporting peer feedback. Improvement in peer assessed scores was observed over time, however student opinions of the educational value were mixed and indeterminate.

show abstract

Authentic Design and Administration of Group-Based Assessments to Improve the Job-Readiness of Project Management Graduates

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Group-based assessments have been recognized as one of the ways of developing work-ready attributes in project management graduates. This paper is aimed at exploring the best practices for improving the administration process of group-based assessments to make it fit for purpose. The study adopted a systematic literature review and 22 semi-structured interviews with project management academics in higher education. The study found that teams should be small in size and formed by the faculty. Tasks should be based on a real-world context and be sufficiently challenging for students. The group should create a team charter to establish expectations and ground rules for group members. Group assessments should include team member peer evaluations and oral presentations to curb social loafing. Academics should be actively involved in giving regular feedback, training students about teamwork, and communicating their expectations to students. The study findings are useful to inform project management academics about the design and administration characteristics that need to be considered to achieve the ultimate purpose of group-based assessments in polishing the job-readiness attributes of project management graduates.

show abstract

Notes from the Field: Evaluating a Budget-Based Approach to Peer Assessment for Measuring Collaboration Among Learners on Interprofessional Teams

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

A Holistic Overview of Studies to Improve Group-Based Assessments in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review

A Holistic Overview of Studies to Improve Group-Based Assessments in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review

Peer assessment of professionalism in undergraduate medical education

Authentic Design and Administration of Group-Based Assessments to Improve the Job-Readiness of Project Management Graduates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About