DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Current State and Prospects of Peer Assessment

동료평가의 현황과 전망

  • Park, Jooyong (Department of Psychology & Institute of Psychological Science) ;
  • Park, Jung Ae (Department of Psychology & Institute of Psychological Science)
  • 박주용 (서울대학교 심리학과 & 심리과학 연구소) ;
  • 박정애 (서울대학교 심리학과 & 심리과학 연구소)
  • Received : 2018.06.18
  • Accepted : 2018.06.18
  • Published : 2018.06.30

Abstract

Peer assessment in educational setting, refers to activities in which students provide grades or comments on other students' accomplishments such as writing, presentation, or performances. In case of writing, peer assessment can allow instructors to give out more writing assignments, which were often avoided because of the burden of grading. Moreover, grading other students' writing can enhance learning by having students participate in the assessment process. This review will introduce major peer assessment systems and results from empirical studies on peer assessment, examine obstacles to its more wide-spread use, and discuss topics for further research. We hope this paper will facilitate further studies and use of peer assessment in actual educational settings, and eventually lead to many changes in assessment and teaching in Korea.

동료평가란 학생들이 다른 학생의 글, 발표, 집단 활동과 같은 평가 대상이 될 수 있는 모든 결과물이나 수행 과정에 대해 점수를 매기거나 의견을 제공하는 활동을 가리킨다. 동료평가는 채점부담으로 인해 잘 활용되지 않는 글쓰기 기회를 늘릴 수 있을 뿐만 아니라, 평가를 하는 과정을 통해 학습도 향상시킬 수 있다는 장점이 있다. 본 개관 논문에서는, 주요 동료평가 시스템과 동료평가를 사용한 경험적 연구 결과를 소개한 다음, 동료평가 확산의 장애 요인을 살펴보고, 앞으로의 연구에서 해결되어야 할 과제가 논의되었다. 이 논의를 통해 동료평가에 대한 후속 연구가 활성화되고 동료평가가 실제 교육 장면에서 활용되어, 우리나라의 평가와 수업 방법에 큰 변화를 가져오기를 기대해본다.

Keywords

References

  1. 노정혜, 전헌수, 김상현, 이철범, 이준호, 허영숙, 홍성욱, 박주용, 곽지훈, 윤창규 (2016). 학문의 정직성에 관한 명예서약 제도 도입을 위한 정책연구 보고서. 서울대학교 자연과학대학.
  2. 박주용 (2017). 대학 수업에서부터 시작하는 대한민국 교육개혁. 철학과 현실, 113, 126-150.
  3. 배수정, 박주용 (2016). 대학 수업에서 누적 동료평가 점수를 활용한 성적 산출 방법의 타당성. 인지과학, 27(2), 221-245.
  4. 연합뉴스 2014.11.4. 한국 아동 '삶의 만족도' OECD 최하위
  5. 이현정 (2017). 채점예시답안이 동료평가의 정확성에 미치는 영향, 서울대학교 석사학위논문.
  6. Ashenafi, M.M. (2017). Peer-assessment in higher education-twenty-first century practices, challenges and the way forward. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 226-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1100711
  7. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.
  8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
  9. Bligh, D. (1972). What's the use of lectures? Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.
  10. Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
  11. Bloxham, S., den-Outer, B., Hudson J., & Price, M. (2016). Let's stop the pretence of consistent marking: Exploring the multiple limitations of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 466-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1024607
  12. Cho, K., Schunn, C.D., & Wilson, R.W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891-901. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891
  13. Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL Students' writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61-84. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.46.1.c
  14. Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: Towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1111294
  15. Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. The Journal of the learning sciences, 19(1), 54-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452876
  16. Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070003287
  17. Finlayson, D.S. (1951). The reliability of the marking of essays. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 21(2), 126-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1951.tb02776.x
  18. Hafner, J., & Hafner, P. (2003). Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: An empirical study of student peer-group rating. International Journal of Science Education, 25(12), 1509-1528. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000038268
  19. Hunter, K., & Docherty, P. (2011). Reducing variation in the assessment of student writing. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903215842
  20. Jeffery, D., Yankulov, K., Crerar, A., & Ritchie, K. (2016). How to achieve accurate peer assessment for high value written assignments in a senior undergraduate course. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.987721
  21. Johnson, R. L., Penny, J., Gordon, B., Shumate, S. R., & Fisher, S. P. (2005). Resolving score differences in the rating of writing samples: Does discussion improve the accuracy of scores? Language Assessment Quarterly, 2(2), 117-146. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0202_2
  22. Joordens, S., Pare, D.E., & Pruesse, K. (2009). peerScholar: An evidence-based online peer-assessment tool supporting critical thinking and clear communication. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on e-Learning (pp. 236-240).
  23. Li, H., Xiong, Y., Zang, X., Kornhaber, M.L., Lyu, Y., Chung K.S., & Suen, H.K. (2016). Peer assessment in the digital age: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 245-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.999746
  24. Liu, X., & Li, L. (2014). Assessment training effects on student assessment skills and task performance in a technology-facilitated peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(3), 275-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.823540
  25. Liu, X., li, L., & Zhang, Z. (2018). Small group discussion as a key component in online assessment training for enhanced student learning in web-based peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1324018
  26. Park, J. (2017). ClassPrep: A peer review system for class preparation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 511-523. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12390
  27. Purchase, H., & Hamer, J. (2018). Perspectives on peer-review: Eight years of Aropa. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 473-487. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1359819
  28. Resnick, L. (1986). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
  29. Roediger, H. L, Putnam, A. L., & Smith, M. A. (2011). Ten benefits of testing and their applications to educational practice. In B. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55. Academic Press.
  30. Russell J., van Horne, S. V., Ward, A. S., Bettis III, E. A., & Gikonyo, J. (2017). Variability in students' evaluating processes in peer assessment with calibrated peer review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 178-190. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12176
  31. Sadler, P. M., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1101_1
  32. Schunn, C., Godley, A., & De Martino, S. (2016). The reliability and validity of peer review of writing in high school AP English classes. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 60(1). 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.525
  33. Singleton-Jackson, J. A., Jackson, D. L., & Reinhardt, J. (2010). Students as consumers of knowledge: Are they buying what we're selling? Innovation in Higher Education, 35(5), 343-358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-010-9151-y
  34. Sluijsmans, D.M.A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merrienboer, J.J.G. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on performance and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 443-454. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009311
  35. Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
  36. Tsai, Y. C., & Chuang, M. T. (2013). Fostering revision of argumentative writing through structured peer assessment. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 116(1) 210-221. https://doi.org/10.2466/10.23.PMS.116.1.210-221
  37. Van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Peer assessment in university teaching: Evaluating seven course designs. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500262346
  38. Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merrienboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004
  39. Wenglinsky, H. (2002). The link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10, 12. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v10n12.2002
  40. Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students' performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. The Internet and Higher Education. 11(3-4), 186-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.005
  41. Yucel, R., Bird, F. L., Young, J., & Blanksby, T. (2014). The road to self-assessment: Exemplar marking before peer review develops first-year students' capacity to judge the quality of a scientific report. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 971-986. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.880400
  42. Zheng, L. Cui, P., Li, X., & Huang, R. (2018). Synchronous discussion between assessors and assessees in web-based peer assessment: Impact on writing performance, feedback quality, meta-cognitive awareness and self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 500-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1370533

Cited by

  1. 동료의 문제 만들기 과제를 평가하는 과정에서 나타난 예비교사의 주목하기: 순열과 조합을 중심으로 vol.24, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.30807/ksms.2021.24.1.002