Peer assessment

Hill West Research Papers EDU7149: Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL

Peer Assessment

By Hannah Cook

October 2013

Masters in Teaching and Learning EDU7149: Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL What impact does peer assessment have on learning and progress when used in the Primary classroom?

Hannah Cook Student Number: S12799691 Assignment Tutor: Phil Taylor Word Count: 3775

Section 1: Development focus and rationale

For this module I will be focusing on the use of peer assessment in the Primary classroom, with a specific focus on Key Stage 2. I am interested to find out what impact, if any, the use of peer assessment has on learning and progress, identifying strengths and potential weaknesses related to it.

Since its introduction in April 2011, there has been an increased focus on Pupil Premium and how we make best use of funding to narrow the achievement gap for disadvantaged pupils (OfSTED, 2013), which has led to Senior Leadership Teams in schools making smarter use of research to inform their spending.

‘Effective

feedback’ is highlighted by The Sutton Trust (2013) as being one of the most successful approaches to accelerate progress. I believe this has resulted in the notion of it becoming increasingly central to our view of best practice in terms of teaching, learning and progress. I am interested in the extent to which effective feedback can benefit pupils in a Primary School setting and wanted to link this closely with areas of development for our particular school (School A), and for me personally.

Although peer assessment is used within School A and forms part of the Marking and Presentation Policy (2010) the benefits of it are not always clear and it is often an ‘add-on’ to a lesson. The OfSTED report for School A emphasised that pupils were not participating enough in some areas of their learning, such as “setting and checking on their progress towards their personal learning targets” (OfSTED, 2009: 5). As identified in the Audit and Action Plan (see Appendix A), the need for this within my current setting, alongside the positive references made to the use of peer assessment by The Sutton Trust, and a personal philosophy that collaboration and meta-cognition are vital skills, has led me to investigate: 

What are the potential pitfalls or issues around the use of peer assessment?



How is success criteria best used to enhance the quality of peer assessment?



What impact (if any) does the use of peer assessment have on learning and progress?

Section 2: Critical review of the literature

Before discussing its effectiveness, it is important to clarify what is meant by the term ‘peer assessment’.

Briggs et al (2008) challenge the perception that peer

assessment merely involves swapping books and marking each other’s work, although it could be argued that the definition they provide, that peer assessment involves “assessing others’ work and receiving feedback from their peers.”

(2008:31), does not entirely disregard this assumption. This seems to be a very simplistic and one-dimensional definition, and does not account for some of the complexities within peer assessment, for example working in pairs or groups to assess. Perhaps this definition provided by Deakin-Crick et al, which argues that peers assess each other “through reflection on the goals and what it means to achieve them” (2005:3), is more precise.

There is much debate within recent literature concerning the effectiveness of peer assessment and how it is best carried out. For example, research suggests that one major benefit stems from the fact that that it requires children to speak to each other about their work (Mansell et al 2009; Deakin-Crick et al 2005; Black et al 2004). One advantage of this, as argued by Leahy et al (2005) and corroborated by Mansell et al (2009), is that children explain their work to each other clearly as they can talk to each other using informal language. Deakin-Crick et al (2005) go one step further, suggesting that children might be less constrained when speaking to their peers compared to a teacher, allowing them to ask questions and make comments without feeling as self-conscious.

While the claim that peers are honest with one another is substantiated by Black and William (2001), Topping et al (2000) identify in their research that this is not always the case, as students can find it difficult to be critical of their peers. Although this research focused on higher education, it could be argued that this is even more likely to be the case for younger children. Furthermore this could explain why “students often lack confidence in both their own and their peers’ abilities as assessors” (Ballantyne et al 2002: 429). Wragg, on the other hand, explores the possibility that children of a primary school age “may be harsh or even unfair in their appraisal of what they see as their ‘competitors’” (2001: 67).

Whether or not students are reliable is seen as of no great concern by some researchers. Yang et al (2006) found that students were likely to question or correct feedback given by a fellow pupil, taking greater ownership of their learning. However they may assume that a teacher had indicated all of their errors leading to acceptance without challenge and a failure to improve all aspects of their work.

Topping et al (2000) found it was sometimes the case that teachers’ comments were generic whereas student remarks were much more meticulous. It could be argued that this conflicts with the view of Sadler (1998) who discusses the fact that teachers have a large base of knowledge to which they can refer, as well as a vested interest (and aspiration) for their pupils to make progress and succeed academically, suggesting that teacher feedback is more effective than peer assessment. Maybe this is the case, but if so it would appear that this is a very narrow view of feedback as a means to an end, not taking into account the skills pupils can learn and the ownership they have throughout the process.

This leads onto a further argument, which is evident in a variety of research, that accurate evaluation is not the only benefit of (or reason for) engaging in peer assessment. Deakin-Crick et al (2005) explain that academic progress is not the only factor in deciding the impact of peer assessment, and that effective peer assessment means that pupils take more ownership of their learning, as Yang et al (2006) suggest, which is a positive outcome in itself. Research published by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) supports this assertion, maintaining that peer assessment is actually required in order to cultivate “personal responsibility…reflection…self-esteem…motivation” in our pupils (2003:4). Whilst this is likely to be true for most children, we do need to ensure that lower ability children do not feel intimidated when engaging in peer assessment (Sadler 1989).

Dochy

and

McDowell

(1997)

agree

that

peer

assessment

can

improve

communication skills, although they maintain that its success is dependent upon the conditions under which the peer assessment takes place.

Before considering the factors teachers need to address when using peer assessment within the classroom, it would be beneficial to establish whether there is a particular age at which students become more capable of peer assessment. There

seems to be little in the literature regarding this. Wragg (2001) suggests that selfassessment can be a challenge for younger children, but states that this is not a reason to avoid it. It would be reasonable therefore to suppose that a similar view would be taken of peer assessment and that it “may even be a prior requirement for self-assessment.” (Black et al 2003:50). Interestingly, in an earlier piece of work, Black and William (2001) claim to have seen successful peer assessment in children as young as five.

Similarly, following their research carried out in Scottish primary

schools, Kirton et al insist that children of all ages could participate in peer assessment “providing it was structured appropriately” (2007: 617).

A wide collection of research insists that students need to be taught how to assess each other effectively. Sebba et al (2008) even suggest that these skills should be built into daily teaching. There appears to be very little research regarding how this should be taught best. For example, Briggs et al are clear that “Peer assessment needs some teaching input if it is to be successful” (2008: 120) but they do not elaborate further. It is well documented in literature that for children to be able to peer assess effectively they need to have a clear understanding of the success criteria, which does of course have implications in terms of teaching. As Black and William (2001) point out, it is unrealistic to expect children to assess one another without a clear knowledge of what they are aiming towards. Sebba et al (2008) whose research involved secondary pupils, suggest that students should be involved in devising these criteria. It can be argued that this is the case in primary education as well. The amount of research insisting that effective peer assessment requires careful teaching and commitment causes Sadler’s assertion that it “reduces the assessment workload for teachers” (1989: 140) to appear idealistic. Research by Mansell et al (2009) makes reference to the fact that the amount of time teachers can give to help their pupils develop these skills is restricted.

In summary, the research shows that the benefits of using peer assessment, even from a young age, are not confined to academic progress but include developing communication skills and giving pupils greater ownership of their learning. Research suggests that in order to gain the most from peer assessment, time needs to be invested by the teacher in ‘training’ the students to peer assess effectively and clear criteria by which to evaluate the work should be provided.

Section 3: Justification of methods and ethical issues

Initially, a pupil questionnaire was devised based on both experience and findings in the literature in order to ascertain whether children thought peer assessment helped them to learn and any difficulties it presented them with. The questionnaire was administered to the class at the same time. It is appreciated that this method was not entirely reliable, as pupils may have felt pressure to give what they deemed to be the ‘right’ answer, or respond in line with what their peers expressed. However sufficient steps were taken to avoid this - it was clearly explained to the class the context in which this questionnaire would be used, that they could decide to answer it anonymously and that there was no ‘correct’ answer; honesty was the most important thing.

The outcomes of these questionnaires, which will be discussed in depth in the next section, were a contributing factor when determining the curriculum area on which to focus when trialling peer assessment.

A recurrent theme within the responses

related to difficulties in assessing each other’s writing and, as much of the literature referring to peer assessment of writing involves secondary or post-graduate students, it was apparent there was a gap in research. This is with the exception of Kirton et al (2007) whose research regarding the use of peer assessment in Scottish primary schools suggests that in some cases evaluative comments provided by primary-aged pupils for their peers were superficial and focused on quantity of writing rather than content. Quality of feedback was another issue which there would be significance in investigating. The intention therefore was to establish whether success criteria did impact on the effectiveness of peer assessment as suggested in the research cited previously; to uncover any potential difficulties arising from peer assessment of writing within the context of a class in School A; and to determine whether peer assessment had a positive impact on learning and progress.

Subsequently a group of six year four pupils (five boys and one girl) aged seven and eight were selected, and each pupil in the group was made aware of what the project would entail and why.

The children in this group had made limited progress in

writing over the course of the year and their attainment was below expectation

compared to similar children nationally by between one and two sublevels.

In

summary, there would be value in supporting these pupils in developing peer assessment skills, particularly if the advantages formerly cited were experienced as a result.

Furthermore, the additional teacher support they would receive in the

process would allow for acute teacher assessment leading to accurate questioning and next steps to move each child’s learning forward. Of course, this suggests that any quantitative data measured in points progress could not be wholly attributed to the children’s training in peer assessment. Therefore, although children’s levels at the end of the intervention would be taken into account, this would be alongside samples of written peer assessment. This has been collated and entered into a table (see Appendix B).

A baseline was carried out in order to establish the initial quality of their feedback by asking the group of pupils to peer assess their partner’s work, with no additional input. The learning objective and success criteria were available, but the children were not prompted to refer to it. Following this, some whole-class ‘training’ was delivered which focused on using success criteria to give constructive feedback and what this meant, and overcoming some of the issues which arose as a result of the questionnaires.

Over the next four weeks, the identified group of pupils were

supported at least once per week to improve the quality of their peer assessment of writing. This support was predominantly focused on the use of success criteria.

Different ways of using success criteria were included so that any patterns in quality of feedback could be drawn out. For example, children were given different types of success criteria ranging from extensive checklists to specific questions to answer in their feedback.

The results of this, along with the quantitative data mentioned

previously, formed the evidence for analysis.

Section 4: Analysis of evidence and findings

The initial questionnaire (see Appendix C) was an effective way of finding out what pupils struggle with in relation to peer assessment, so some of these things could be addressed promptly.

Firstly, it confirmed that the children who answered it did not

feel that peer assessment (described in the questionnaire as ‘marking or commenting on a classmate’s work’) happened regularly – 70% of pupils answered

that they are only asked to do this ‘sometimes’ or ‘never’. This is indicative of wider issues throughout the school and suggests that, although it forms part of the school’s Marking and Presentation policy which states that children are encouraged “to assess their peers using post-its and the 3*s and a wish principle…at least once weekly”, (2010: 3) peer assessment is not integral to classroom practice at School A. It is not surprising then that over half of the pupils asked (53%) did not feel confident that marking each other’s work helped them to learn. One of the questions asked the children: When you are marking a classmate’s work, what do you find difficult?

There were some clear patterns in the answers given. For example, 15 comments indicated that they found writing difficult to peer assess as they could not read the handwriting or spellings were incorrect.

“Reading it because it isn’t that neat” (Pupil) “The spelling in literacy because it doesn’t make sense” (Pupil)

Interestingly, despite the fact that a class of year four children perceived this to be the biggest barrier to peer assessment, this issue has not been addressed in any research. This may be because much of the research involved higher education and perhaps word-processed work, but Kirton et al (2007) did not reference this matter either.

Another difficulty cited by the pupils supports the findings of Topping et al (2000) as 21% of the comments were in relation to finding it hard to be critical of a partner’s work or to identify their next steps as “it might all be good” (Pupil). “well sometimes when I am marking someone’s literacy work and I find the wish hard if everything is right” (Pupil) Finally, when asked what they find helpful when marking a classmate’s work, the response of many pupils reinforced the claims made by key researchers (Black and William 2001, Sebba et al 2008), that knowing the success criteria is essential when giving feedback. 8 pupils referenced how it is valuable “If they tell me what to look for” (Pupil) when marking a classmate’s work.

As a result of these findings, it was decided that the focus would be on encouraging pupils to read their work to their partner in order to overcome the handwriting and spelling issue, and to alter the way success criteria was given in each task to discover if this had an effect on the quality of peer assessment. The group of six children referred to in the previous section assessed each other’s work over four sessions. The feedback they gave (often in the form of two or three stars and a wish in line with School A’s policy) can be found in Appendix B. This is cross-referenced with the written feedback given by the teacher so that similarities and differences can be identified.

Based on the quality of this assessment, it is clear that the written feedback given by the teacher is much more detailed than that given by the pupils.

Some of the

comments made by pupils were very general and were about the overall quality of work: “Well done Child B you have done good work” (Pupil D) “I liket your pise ov work to day [sic]” (Pupil E)

Comments also focus often on what could be argued as superficial factors. For example, almost one fifth of the comments made by pupils over the four week period related to handwriting, often as a ‘wish’. It could be argued however that this is due to several factors. Firstly, children do not want to criticise one another and secondly, being unable to read their partner’s handwriting is a source of frustration for them (as their questionnaire responses suggested). Finally, it could also be related to the fact that, as suggested by Sadler (1998), children’s subject knowledge is limited and, if they have not understood or reached a learning objective it is unreasonable to expect that they would discern this in their partner’s work.

Although much of the feedback given to each other was insubstantial, this did depend on the type of success criteria provided. The quality of feedback shows that on the day that some time had been built in to explicitly focus on peer assessment with the group, all children who gave written feedback referred to the learning objective or success criteria.

A checklist containing four questions had been

provided for the pupils and they had used this to form their comments.

In the

following session, pupils were given three success criteria and reminded to use

them. The feedback given by the pupils was again quite specific, with four out of five pupils referring to the learning objective in their feedback, and all children giving a comment which correlated with the observations made by the teacher. However, in the subsequent session, pupils were provided with an extensive checklist of things to look for including seven different items.

This appeared to confuse the children,

resulting in just half of them mentioning the learning objective in their feedback.

Therefore the conclusion can be drawn that success criteria does help the children with their peer assessment, but is most effective in the form of questions and with a limited number of things to look for, reinforcing that pupils “must grasp the criteria of quality that they must apply in auditing any work” (Black 2007:21).

Although their comments may not have been sufficient, it would seem that pupils felt more confident when using peer assessment by the end of the project.

A

questionnaire similar to the initial one was administered again to the whole class (see Appendix D), which shows that 87% of children agreed that peer assessment was now taking place ‘nearly always’ or ‘often’. In addition, 70% of children stated that marking a classmate’s work helps them to learn ‘very much’ or ‘quite a lot’. It could be argued that children’s responses show that they are more motivated when peer assessing as many of them believe it has an impact on their progress. This would support the assertion made by the QCA (2003) and cited in section two.

It is also important to mention that the members of the group made an average of 1.5 points progress in their writing over a six-week period.

This is significant as

expected progress across a year is between three and four points per child.

However, as mentioned in the earlier section, it is not reliable to suggest this is a result of peer assessment, as the pupils involved had a substantial amount of teacher intervention over the period of time.

Section 5: Evaluation of impact and implications

There are several findings of this practice-based enquiry relating to the questions raised in the rationale. Firstly, while the class-based research would have been more robust had it taken place over a longer period of time, a main conclusion is that clear, measurable and succinct success criteria are essential in order for children to

peer assess most effectively.

These criteria might differ had the research been

carried out with a younger age group; to extend this enquiry it would be interesting to explore use of success criteria in years one and six.

Secondly, in line with the published evidence it would appear that staff at School A are not aware of the benefits of peer assessment. As the study showed, time to ‘train’ the pupils is a contributing factor to the quality of comments made. If staff are not aware of the benefits, it is unlikely they will put this time in.

Thirdly, there are barriers which can prevent high quality peer assessment including lack of knowledge to draw upon, a reluctance to be critical of one another and difficulties in accessing or understanding the work.

These are all issues which

naturally arise when children are asked to peer assess without having any training or modelling, which links to the previous point.

Finally, the impact on learning and progress is unclear.

As discussed formerly,

children made substantial progress but it is felt that this is unlikely to be solely a result of peer assessment. However, questionnaire analysis demonstrates that a high proportion of pupils believed peer assessment was helping them to learn, showing in increased ownership of their own learning.

These conclusions suggest that staff should be challenged to use peer assessment more frequently. As part of their continued professional development, co-coaching pairs have been set up and colleagues are encouraged to try their own practicebased enquiry to ‘close a gap’ they have identified.

In order to support this, a

summarisation of the research relating to peer assessment has been disseminated to give the team a starting point for their own enquiry (see Appendix E).

References

Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K. & Mylonas, A. (2002) Developing Procedures for Implementing Peer Assessment in Large Classes Using an Action Research Process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27 (5), pp. 427-441.

Black, P. (2007) Full marks for feedback. Making the Grade, Spring 2007, pp.18-21.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2003) Assessment For Learning: Putting it into Practice. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2001) Inside the Black Box - Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. BERA. Briggs, M., Woodfield, A., Swatton, P. and Martin, C. (2008) Assessment for Learning and Teaching in Primary Schools. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Deakin-Crick, R., Sebba, J., Harlen, W., Guoxing, Y. and Lawson, H. (2005) Systematic review of research evidence of the impact on students of self- and peerassessment. Protocol. [pdf] London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London. Available at: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/eppiwebcontent/reel/review_groups/assessment/assessment_pr otocol5.pdf [accessed 19 August 2013].

Dochy, F.J.R.C. and McDowell, L. (1997) Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23 (4), pp. 279- 298.

Higgins, S., Katsipataki, M., Kokotsaki, D., Coe, R., Elliot Major, L. and Coleman, R. (2013) Sutton Trust - EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit. Sutton Trust, Education Endowment Foundation.

Kirton, A., Hallam, S., Peffers, J., Robertson, P. & Stobart, G. (2007) Revolution, evolution or a Trojan horse? Piloting assessment for learning in some Scottish primary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 33 (4), pp. 605-627.

Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., and Wiliam, D. (2005) Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3). pp. 19-24.

Mansell, W., James, M. and the Assessment Reform Group (2009) Assessment in schools. Fit for purpose? A Commentary by the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. London: Economic and Social Research Council, Teaching and Learning Research Programme.

Office for Standards in Education (2013) The Pupil Premium: how schools are spending the funding successfully to maximise achievement [pdf] Manchester: Ofsted Publications. Available at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/pupil-premiumhow-schools-are-spending-funding-successfully-maximise-achievement [Accessed 29 August 2013].

Office for Standards in Education (2009) ‘School A’ Inspection*. [pdf] Ofsted Publications. Available at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/findinspection-report/provider/ELS/134477 [Accessed 29 August 2013].

Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2003) Using assessment to raise achievement in mathematics in Key Stages 1, 2 and 3. [pdf] London: QCA. Available at: http://www.suffolkmaths.co.uk/pages/Teaching%20Skills/Assessment/RaiseAchieve mentMaths.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2013] Sadler, R. (1998) Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5 (1), pp. 77-84.

Sadler, R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems.

Instructional Science, 18 (2), pp. 119-144 ‘School A’ (2010) ‘School A’ Marking and Presentation Policy. [pdf] Available at: (website address removed for confidentiality) [Accessed 29 September 2013]* Sebba, J., Crick, R D., Yu, G., Lawson, H., Harlen, W. and Durant, K. (2008) Systematic review of research evidence of the impact on students in secondary schools of self and peer assessment. Technical report. [pdf] London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London. Available at: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/LinkCl≥ick.aspx?fileticket=HKKPQEO72Ss%3d&tabid=241 5&mid=4477 [accessed 19 August 2013].

Swain, B. (2010) The importance of peer and self assessment. Available at: http://education.scholastic.co.uk/content/13153 [Accessed 26 September 2013] Topping, K.J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I. and Elliot, A. (2000) Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25 (2), pp. 149-169 Wragg, E. C. (2001) Assessment and Learning in the Primary School. 2nd edn.

London: Routledge Yang, M., Badger, R., Yu, Z. (2006) A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15 (3), pp. 179-200. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004 [Accessed 13 September 2013]

*

Name removed for confidentiality

Appendix A Enquiry and Development Focus What is my proposed enquiry and development focus for this module? 

What impact does peer assessment have on learning and progress when used in the Primary classroom?

For this module I propose to focus on the impact peer assessment has on learning and progress, with a focus on key stage 2. I would be interested in researching different ways of introducing and carrying out peer assessment and what the effect of this is when put into practice.

Rationale – why do I want to focus on this? 

I am very interested in the research carried out by The Sutton Trust which analyses the impact of a variety of approaches used by schools. One of the most effective approaches they found in terms of pupil progress is effective feedback, which is low-cost and high impact. In their latest research report, Sutton Trust - EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit (January 2013), it states: ‘Feedback studies tend to show very high effects on learning. However, it also has a very high range of effects and some studies show that feedback can have negative effects and make things worse’ and that good feedback, ‘can come from other peers as well as adults.’ (p.16) Interestingly, Peer Tutoring has also been found to be high impact and low cost, which is based on wide-ranging evidence. The report makes reference to peer assessment, maintaining that: ‘Peer assessment involves the peer tutor providing feedback to children relating to their performance and can have different forms such as reinforcing or correcting aspects of learning.’ (p.25) In addition, meta-cognition and self-regulation is identified by The Sutton Trust as an approach which is high impact and low cost, excelling pupils’ progress by up to 8 months. This also makes reference to self-assessment, stating that ‘these strategies involve being aware of one’s strengths and weaknesses as a learner, such as by developing self-assessment skills, and being able to set and monitor goals.’ (p.22) Therefore all of this research suggests that peer-assessment has a significant impact on pupil progress, and raises many questions, such as is this evident in other research? Is this the case in all Primary schools? And what are the most effective ways of carrying out peer-assessment?

In terms of School A, the Ofsted report (2009) maintained that the school needed to ‘Involve pupils more fully in setting and checking on their progress towards their personal learning targets, and ensure these are securely linked to self-assessment and teachers’ marking.’ (p.5) Personally, I do not yet feel that I use peer assessment often enough, even though it forms part of our Marking and Presentation policy, and am keen to embed it into my practice so that it is an integral part of teaching and learning.

Methods – how will I collect evidence? 

Evidence collection will take many forms, including questionnaires (one at the beginning and one at the end) and samples of pupils work prior, during and post implementation. In addition, evidence gained from pupil progress trackers will form part of the data collection.

Action Plan Module: Teaching and Learning, Personalisation and AfL Actions – what?

By when?

Rationale – why am I doing this?

Review – how is it going?

Ask children about their experience of Peer Assessment in the form of a questionnaire

Monday 3rd June 2013

I want to know what the children think about Peer Assessment – do they really know what it is? Have they had many opportunities to do it? Do they think it will help them make progress?

Why? It will be important to repeat this at the end of the research to see if and/or how children’s opinions have changed regarding Peer Assessment.

Identify a focus group of 6 children to carry out action-based research with.

Monday 3rd June 2013

Having a focus group will enable me to target individuals in the class who are not currently making enough progress and measure the impact of Peer Assessment more easily.

Meet with the children during a writing session. Explain that they will be developing their peer assessment skills. Pair children up initially.

Tuesday 4th June 2013

This will let the children in the group know what will be expected of them and get them thinking about peer assessment.

Key points coming out of questionnaire:  Lots of chn referenced reading the handwriting/spelling as making it difficult to peer assess.  Chn referenced finding it difficult to critical/think of a wish  Many chn referenced the importance of having the WILF or knowing what to look for  A few chn were able to cite ways in which assessing the work of peers helped them in in their own work.  Peer and self assessment were generally viewed as only being used ‘sometimes’ (by the majority of pupils)  Children were very mixed about whether peer/self assessment actually helped them to learn.

I analysed my trackers to identify which group of children were making the slowest progress in writing. There was a core of children currently working at a level 2c or 2b in writing having only made 2 points progress across the year.

Children are keen. The focus group knew what peer assessment was when I asked them.

As a baseline, ask them to P.A their partners’ work using 2 stars and a wish, without giving them too much guidance.

Give some whole class ‘training’ on peerassessment, using clear success criteria and modelling giving feedback verbally.

Collect examples of work.

Following whole class training, give group a list with clear success criteria in the form of questions. Include a space for them to add their own (e.g. targets) Group supported by teacher to peer assess.

Success criteria available and children reminded to use it. No tick list in books.

Tuesday 4th June 2013

The two stars and a wish they produce will be a useful baseline when repeated throughout and at the end of the research.

This has given me a baseline.

Monday 10th June 2013

This will give the whole class some experience of Peer Assessment so I can use it more regularly as AfL.

Whole class training was useful.

Children needed a long time to do this – longer than I have allowed in the past. Filming some children giving verbal feedback to their peers was interesting.

Monday 10th June 2013

I want to see whether the quality of feedback has improved from the first session, having had some training and a big focus on the success criteria.

Wednesday 19th June

This will show me whether children retain what they learnt last week even when they don’t have the criteria written out in the form of questions.

Group given extensive success criteria by which to peer assess (7 points to look for in total)

Monday 24th June

This was to ascertain whether the amount of success criteria impacted in any way on the quality of feedback.

Administer questionnaire to class at the end of the project, asking them to reflect on their learning.

Week beginning Monday 8th July

Has the peer assessment had any impact on children’s perceptions of their progress and achievement?

Children’s confidence? Children’s opinions about peer assessment ad whether it helps them learn.

Review trackers – has there been any progress?

Week beginning Monday 8th July

Has the peer assessment had any impact on learning and progress?

Children were much more focused in their feedback, all referring to Learning objective/ success criteria in their comments. Feedback was less superficial (e.g. no comments about neatness of handwriting).

Again, children were specific in their feedback – 4/5 children mentioned Learning objective in their feedback, and all children’s comments correlated with teacher comments.

Additional notes:  Got chn to read their work to each other which they said made it much easier  Some examples of well thought-out comments  Still some 1 dimensional comments  Lots of chn referring to WILF in comments Having lots of things to look for seemed to change quality of feedback significantly. Only half of the group made reference to the learning objective/success criteria and half of them wrote a comment which was actually opposite to the teacher feedback.

Reduced questionnaire to just 3 questions as I felt that the first one was a little too extensive.

Outcomes of the questionnaire showed that:  Children said they were asked to peer assess regularly  Children believed that peer assessment helped them to learn Child A made 3 points progress Child B made 2 points progress Child C made 2 points progress Child D made 0 points progress Child E made 1 point progress Child F made 1 point progress Average points progress = 1.5

However, the amount of teacher support will have impacted here.

EDU7149: Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL

Evaluation What happened and why do I think it happened?  What did I do to help develop my understanding?  Who did I talk to? What did I read?  To what extent did my methods help me to understand more about my development focus? o Updated myself on school policy (particularly Marking and Presentation) and what this said about peer assessment o Read the last Ofsted report making a note of the references to meta-cognition/ peer assessment o Informal discussions with staff about their use of peer assessment o Scrutinised planning to ascertain whether use of self/peer assessment was explicit o Shared enquiry and development focus with course tutor who provided me with some key research to read o Pulled out key themes and recorded these o Questionnaire carried out initially which drew my attention to many of the issues children have relating to peer assessment. This gave me a greater understanding of peer assessment from the pupils’ perspective o Decided to focus on success criteria as this was a key theme in literature and through the questionnaires o Providing children with different types of success criteria resulted in varying quality of peer assessment which enabled me to draw conclusions What has been the impact on practice, so far?  Personal/professional; o I can see the value of peer assessment when the children are taught how to do it, and am more willing to put the time in for this o I am more precise when developing learning objectives and success criteria to ensure they are clear, measurable and children understand them o I encourage children to read their work to one another as they saw this as a significant barrier to peer assessment  Departmental/subject; o Findings were shared informally with year partner throughout the enquiry, who also planned peer assessment into lessons  School/institutional. o Staff will be encouraged to consider the impact of peer assessment for themselves through our co-coaching CPD where they will have access to a research summary sheet. They may choose to use this to help them ‘close the gap’ for a specific group of pupils What next?  What are the future implications of my work for this module?  What might be my future development foci?  How will I continue to develop my practice? o Policies will need to be updated to include research and staff reminded of these o Encourage staff in other year groups to investigate which type of success criteria work best for their class. E.g. what can year 1 cope with as opposed to year 6? o Investigate how to best support lower ability children in developing peer assessment skills o Carry out peer assessment on work which is word-processed to explore whether comments are less superficial when the issue of handwriting is taken away o Look into self assessment and how peer assessment can lead to this

EDU7149: Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL

Appendix B – Analysis of written feedback from pupils and teacher 4th June 2013 (no help) L.O To open a sentence with an adverbial phrase PUPIL A Start: 16 points End: 19 points

Teacher Comment

PUPIL B Start: 15 points End: 17 points

Teacher Comment

PUPIL C Start: 15 points End: 17 points Teacher Comment

* good description * complete lerning obgectiv

10th June 2013 (after training) with success criteria tick list – 4 items with a space for two more L.O To organise my writing clearly

19th June 2013 (success criteria available but no tick list provided) L.O To use effective punctuation

24th June 2013 (extensive success criteria listed in books [7 items]) L.O To use vocabulary for effect

* used conclusion *great introdudsoin * good reasons WISH – complete target

* target achieved * good punctatoin * completed LO WISH – spell things correctly

*good words you really scared me * good punctuatoin WISH – could you use a suitibal adjectiv

*good punctuation including ? and ! * I love the way you involved the reader – would you like that? * would and should spelt correctly – HOORAY!! Target achieved!

WISH – New target: Use apostrophes for omission correctly.

* fantastic use of the word ‘saturated’ * you have used some short sentences for effect * good use of exclamation mark WISH – remember your target is to use an apostrophe for omission. Try to achieve this in your next piece of writing.

* achieve target * use pucuion * nice handwritting

*good pucuation *brilliend billient work WISH - achieve target

* 5 sentences punctuated correctly – target achieved * written in first person and thought about how Gromit is feeling and why * paragraphs WISH – new target: use ‘but’, ‘because’ or ‘so’ in a sentence

* good use of a question *you used all your target connectives – well done * I loved the sentence about your heart beating WISH – new target: to open a sentence with an adverb

* good punchooashun * deeing [being] sarcastic WISH – put ful stops in your writing

* good punchooashn * you yoused a connective WISH – more werc (you did good werc yesterday)

* you have thought about how Gromit feels and why * Most apostrophes for omission correct – target achieved

* included an adverb – slowly * opened a sentence with ‘Just then’ * used ‘until’ to connect sentences WISH – you missed lots of full stops today –

* attempted to include adverbial phrases * thought of some effective adjectives * No over-use of ‘and’ – target achieved WISH – write at least 5 sentences which start with a capital letter and end with . ! or ?

* met your target WISH – different opernes

* used a paragh for each reason *used an introdtino * conncluion WISH – spell your d and b corectly

* you opened one sentence with an adverbial phrase * some super vocabulary – peculiar, longforgotten *punctuation is good WISH – you must focus more on your spelling as it is so important. Today you were copying your L.O and still made lots of errors. * you met the learning [objective] WISH – yous beter vocadyary

* good attempts to use adverbial phrases *used expanded noun phrase * tried hard with your handwriting WISH – Try to show me a capital F next time

* inclooded intraducshun * yousd a new paragraf for eech resun WISH – yous your target

PUPIL D Start: 16 points End: 16 points

Teacher Comment

PUPIL E Start: 15 points End: 16 points

*good descrion WISH – listen to the learning objectiv

*able to use an adverbial phrase to open a sentence * included expanded noun phrase – target met * Good verbs – perched, crashed WISH – new target: to use an apostrophe for omission correctly (don’t, wouldn’t etc) * well done did your LO

Teacher Comment

* excellent adverbial phrases to open sentences *super adjectives *use of commas within sentences WISH – you are still struggling with ‘a’ and ‘g’ so we will keep the target alongside a new one

PUPIL F Start: 17 points End: 18 points

* well done you met the LO * exserlent adverbyeal praise WISH – make your handwritting more clear

Teacher Comment

* include an introduction * use an apostrophe cractly No wish given

* super adverbial phrases to open sentences! * You thought hard about your punctuation today * handwriting is getting neater with lots of letters joined WISH – you forgot about your target

No comments given, just tick list filled in

* lovely handwriting today WISH – new target: I agree with Pupil C – make sure each sentence ends with some punctuation

let’s achieve this target next lesson.

* good punchation *well done Pupil B good work WISH – to make handwriting neater

* well done Pupil B you have done good work * good punchation WISH – achive target

* you have written in first person * some accurate punctuation * used one apostrophe for omission accurately WISH – look where I have highlighted pink.

Can you write the word accurately below remembering your apostrophe?

* you used ‘crept’ instead of walked * used an apostrophe for omission- target achieved * organised into paragraphs WISH – new target: to write neatly, joining up at least 3 sentences

ABSENT

* I liket your pise ov work to day WISH – you need to do your target

* effective verb – crawled * you tried really hard to join up your writing – keep it up! Target achieved * you have tried to change the length of some of your sentences WISH – New target: can you join up your writing in every sentence?

No comments given, just tick list filled in

*you acived your target * good handwirting *you put two pargrachs WISH – write a bit neter

* acived your target *you got 7 points WISH – a littel more writting

* you worked independently *wrote in first person, thinking about Gromit’s feelings * generally good punctuation * Target achieved – keep it up WISH – new target: plan your writing on your whiteboard before you start

* Pupil F saw you plan your work today I am a little disappointed with your writing today and want to see much more good quality writing next lesson WISH – new target: to write at least 7 sentences which start with a capital letter and end with a full stop

Findings

  

4/6 (66.6%) children mentioned or referred to the LO in their feedback 5/6 (83.3%) children gave comments similar to the teacher comment 3/6 (50%) children gave comments which opposed the teacher comment

Key Comment links or refers to the LO Comment matches one of the Teacher comments Comment opposes the Teacher comments



All children (100%) who gave written feedback referred to the LO/Success criteria in one or more of their comments

  

4/5 (80%) children mentioned or referred to the LO in their feedback 5/5 (100%) children gave comments similar to the teacher comment No children gave comments which opposed the teacher comment

  

3/6 (50%) children mentioned or referred to the LO/ success criteria in their feedback 3/6 (50%) children gave comments similar to the teacher comment 3/6 (50%) children gave comments which opposed the teacher comment

EDU7149: Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL

Appendix C – Initial Questionnaire

Assessment for Learning How often do teachers ask you to mark or comment on your work and progress in lessons? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 1 10 19 0 (3%) (33%) (63%) How much do you think this helps you learn? very much quite a lot 5 9 (17%) (30%)

a bit 12 (40%)

not much 4 (13%)

How often do teachers ask you to mark or comment on a class-mate’s work in lessons? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 1 8 20 1 (3%) (27%) (67%) (3%) How much do you think this helps you learn? very much quite a lot 5 8 (18%) (29%) *Two children did not give an answer for this question

a bit 9 (32%)

not much 6 (21%)

How often do teachers provide guidelines (criteria) to help you to mark your own or a classmate’s work so you can judge how good it is and how to improve it? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 9 6 10 5 (30%) (20%) (33%) (17%) How often do teachers ask you to work in pairs or groups to help you do well in lessons or to discuss how to improve your work? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 4 20 6 0 (13%) (67%) (20%) How much do you think this helps you learn? very much quite a lot 5 14 (17%) (47%)

a bit 11 (37%)

not much 0

When you are marking a classmate’s work, what do you find difficult?

Out of 28 comments: 15 of them (54%) referenced reading the handwriting/spelling as making it difficult to peer assess. 

To read and understand



Literacy - Reading their work. Maths – to see if their sums are right



Reading their writing and if they are someone in a higher group



Reading it and understanding it and marking it



Reading it because it isn’t that neat



Sometimes the handwriting and spelling



Reading their writing



The spelling, if it doesn’t make sense what it means, what they are writing



The spelling in literacy because it doesn’t make sense



Sometimes I cannot read it



To read people’s writing if their spelling is wrong



Reading it.



Reading it and not being mean



literacy neater handwriting



when I read Amelia’s work I don’t know some words

Out of 28 comments: 6 of them (21%) referenced finding it difficult to critical/think of a wish 

If they do it brilliant work it will be hard to think what they need to do



Writing a comment to improve them



If I’m marking someone’s who’s very good it will be hard to find a wish



well sometimes when I am marking someone’s literacy work and I find the wish hard if everything is right



it might be all good



Giving wishes.

Other comments 

Reading the tricky words. Finding all the WILF



Trying to find the really good words



3 stars and a wish



in literacy looking for the WILF like adverbs or L.O



thinking about what to put



The three stars in maths and a wish



Writing more and being quick

When you are marking a classmate’s work, what do you find helpful?

Out of 19 comments: 8 of them (42%) referenced the importance of having the WILF or knowing what to look for 

The WILF



To know what I need to look out for



A sticker telling us what the WILF are



What I need to do



Knowing what the WILF is



If they tell me a list of what to look for



The WILF

Out of 19 comments:

8 of them (42%) referenced the fact it would be helpful to have some support in reading the work 

If its hard to read I would like them to read it to me



If someone helped me read it



Writing work more clearly



To know what things mean



A teacher helping me do my 3 stars and a wish



Presentation, neat writing



Read some tricky words



If they made their handwriting better

Other comments  New words (if they have any) so I can use them in my work 

To read it and then do a comment



Pencil, ruler



If they’ve done all the WILFs and I haven’t done one

Appendix D – Final Questionnaire

Assessment for Learning Carried out on Monday 8th July 2013 How often do teachers ask you to mark or comment on a class-mate’s work in lessons? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 18 8 4 0 (60%) (27%) (13%) How much do you think this helps you learn? very much quite a lot a bit 12 9 4 (40%) (30%) (13%)

not much 5 (17%)

How often do teachers provide guidelines (criteria) to help you to mark your own or a classmate’s work so you can judge how good it is and how to improve it? nearly always Often Sometimes Never 13 8 8 1 (43%) (27%) (27%) (3%)

Appendix E – Evidence of Dissemination (Research summary)