Student Self-Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis

Falchikov, Nancy; Boud, David

doi:10.2307/1170205

Cited by 437 publications

(281 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

250

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although theory tells us that the opinion of each group member should be weighted by its reliability (11,32), empirical research cautions that this is easier said than done. To start with, we tend to grossly misestimate our own competence-not only when judged in isolation but also relative to others (14)(15)(16). This raises the question of whetherand to what extent-people take into account individual differences in competence when they engage in collective decision-making.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, people tend to overestimate their own performance on hard tasks; paradoxically, when given an easy task, they tend to underestimate their own performance (the hard-easy effect) (12,13). Relatedly, when comparing themselves to others, people with low competence tend to think they are as good as everyone else, whereas people with high competence tend to think they are as bad as everyone else (the Dunning-Kruger effect) (14)(15)(16). In addition, when presented with expert advice, people tend to insist on their own opinion, even though they would have benefitted from following the advisor's recommendation (egocentric advice discounting) (17)(18)(19).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Equality bias impairs collective decision-making across cultures

Mahmoodi

Bang

Olsen

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tend to think that everyone deserves an equal say in a debate. This seemingly innocuous assumption can be damaging when we make decisions together as part of a group. To make optimal decisions, group members should weight their differing opinions according to how competent they are relative to one another; whenever they differ in competence, an equal weighting is suboptimal. Here, we asked how people deal with individual differences in competence in the context of a collective perceptual decision-making task. We developed a metric for estimating how participants weight their partner's opinion relative to their own and compared this weighting to an optimal benchmark. Replicated across three countries (Denmark, Iran, and China), we show that participants assigned nearly equal weights to each other's opinions regardless of true differences in their competence-even when informed by explicit feedback about their competence gap or under monetary incentives to maximize collective accuracy. This equality bias, whereby people behave as if they are as good or as bad as their partner, is particularly costly for a group when a competence gap separates its members.social cognition | joint decision-making | bias | equality

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Equality bias impairs collective decision-making across cultures

Mahmoodi

Bang

Olsen

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The benefits of students capable of demonstrating effective self-assessment has been documented in many studies of self-assessment (see Falchikov and Boud 1989). It is recognised that high achievers tend to underestimate performance and low achievers over-estimate performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Engaging with Graduate Attributes through Encouraging Accurate Student Self-Assessment

Lawson¹,

Taylor²,

Thompson³

et al. 2012

ASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

4This work was part of an ALTC Funded Project -Facilitating staff and student engagement with graduate attribute development, assessment and standards. The project team would like to acknowledge the work of the teaching team of subject (Dr Peter Docherty & Mr Harry Tse) for their contribution to this study. AbstractSelf-assessment can be conceptualised as the involvement of students in identifying assessment criteria and standards that they can apply to their work in order to make judgements about whether they have met these criteria (Boud, 1995). It is a process that promotes student learning rather than just grade allocation. However, self-assessment does not have obvious face validity for students; and many students find that making an objective assessment of their work difficult (Lindblom-ylanne, Pihlajamak & Kotkas, 2006). Previous business education research has also found that self-assessment does not closely reflect either peer or instructor assessments (Campbell, et al., 2001).The current study aimed to explore: (a) the relationship between self-assessment grading and teacher assessment; and (b) the effect of self-assessment in engaging students with graduate attributes, in order to explore the tenets of self-assessment This process of self-assessment was investigated through application of an online assessment system, ReView, to encourage more effective self-assessment in business education. Data collected from two groups (student and teacher) demonstrated that: (1) initial self-assessment results between the teaching academics and the students' self-assessment, were significantly different with students overestimating their ability on every criterion; (2) however, the variation diminished with time to the point that there was no significant difference between the two assessments; and (3) students' awareness of the graduate attributes for their degree program increased from the beginning to the end of the subject (Note 1).

show abstract

“…Therefore, this area of research remains a viable topic of investigation. In addition, although the subject area of study seems to have contributed to the results obtained from prior studies (Falchikov and Boud, 1989;Falchikov and Goldfinch, 2000;Dochy, Segers and Sluijsmans, 1999), less than a handful of SA and/or PA studies are relevant to accounting education, some having been conducted in the business studies discipline (e.g., Orpen 3 , 1994;Freeman, 1995;Johnson and Smith 4 , 1997;Larres, Ballantine and Whittington, 2003). These few studies vary in terms of scope (either self-or peer-evaluations), purpose (examine the accuracy, reliability and/or validity of the assessment) and the student task (presentations, quizzes or tests).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Hassan

Fox

Hannah

2014

Accounting Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-and peer-assessment of student work is an area that is under-researched in the accounting education literature, although the subject area of study seems to influence the results obtained in prior studies. The current study contributes to the literature by examining the accuracy and construct validity of self-and peer-assessment by accounting students. It also investigates students' views about these exercises. The findings show that whilst the self-and peer-assessment of students appear to be neither accurate nor valid, the students are positive about the impact of these procedures on their learning experience. These findings indicate that, although instructors might not rely on self-and peer-assessment as measures of student performance for the purpose of summative assessment, the exercise may prove useful for formative assessment because it can promote a wide range of transferable skills.

show abstract

Student Self-Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis

Cited by 437 publications

References 0 publications

Equality bias impairs collective decision-making across cultures

Equality bias impairs collective decision-making across cultures

Engaging with Graduate Attributes through Encouraging Accurate Student Self-Assessment

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About