PEER ASSESSMENT OF ORAL
PRESENTATION SKILLS
1- Peer assessment presented as an additional
alternative to strengthen this central role of
assessment.
2- Stress the influence of assessment on
learning & show a switch in assessment
responsibilities from teacher to student
towards peer assessment.
3- Self-assessment scores are for the most
part, higher than the marks given by teacher,
reflect a very positive attitude of student
towards peer assessment as a relevant source
of external feedback.
4- Peer marks are on average 5% higher than
marks given by their tutors, peer assessment
can be a relevant substitute for assessment by
teachers.
5- Hypothesizes that ‘involving students in
the assessment of presentations is extremely
beneficial’ for developing self-regulating
skills.
6- The rubric sum score reported by teachers
is significantly lower as compared to the peer
assessment.
7- Peer only assessed “first presentations”.
8- Interaction effect gender of the assessor
and gender of the assessed was not
significant for teacher but was significant for
peers.
9- Stress the importance of giving student
sufficient practice and discussion to develop
a shared understanding of the explicit and
tacit assessment criteria.
10- You can learn from the feedback of peer
and I think students should be able to assess
each other.
- The scale as used in this study, reflects a
good reliability.
HOW EFFECTIVE ARE SELF AND
PEER ASSESSMENT OF ORAL
PRESENTATION SKILLS COMPARED
TO TEACHERS’ ASSESSMENTS?
1- Focuses on agreement between
professional assessment & self and peer
assessment of oral presentation skills.
2- Shifting part of the responsibilities for
assessment & feedback from the teacher to
the student has next to educational benefit-
also benefits in terms of reducing teaching
workload.
3- Stresses that the priori-assumption that
assessment by a teacher is more reliable &
more valid can be double in some contexts.
4- They point out that student did not always
assess the same elements or criteria as their
teachers did.
5- Student were able to provide a reliable
overall assessment but needed additional
traning to provide reliable marks on
specific of oral presentation.
6- A quality control of the assessment
process was carried out, focused on the way
teachers applied the assessment rubric.
7- It was consistently the same teacher
adopting a more lenient view as compared to
the other assessors.
8- This implies that male assessors ware not
severe or lenient than female assessor, male
peers attributed higher score than female
peers to presenter, female presenter did
however obtain higher score than male
presenter.
9- It is insufficient to concrete on more detail
indicator for assessment comprehensive.
10 - State that it is not only the quality of the
feedback evolving from the assessment that
is crucial but what a student does with the
feedback.
- in our opinion, a combination of both views
is need.
- on the one hand we do not want student to
take wrong actions based on low quality
feedback but on the other we want students to
do something with the feedback.