Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

31
Peer Feedback in Groups for Individual Submissions School of Biological Sciences

description

Individual students were asked to complete assessment questions. They then attended a 'marking event' in a Teaching Studio where they graded each others work with support from staff.

Transcript of Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Page 1: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Peer Feedback in Groups for

Individual Submissions

School of Biological Sciences

Page 2: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What it means

Page 3: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Group B-1

Group B

Group A-2

A-1

A-2

B-1

B-2

Group A-1

Group A

Group B-2

Tutor

Prior to class

(individual submission)

In class

(group marking

of other group’s

Submissions)

Page 4: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What question does it address?

Page 5: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Why is it important?

Page 6: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What did we do

Page 7: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 8: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Group B-1

Group B

Group A-2

A-1

A-2

B-1

B-2

Group A-1

Group A

Group B-2

Tutor

Prior to class

(individual submission)

In class

(group marking

of other group’s

Submissions)

Page 9: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Q1 Qn

Instance Session

Establish groups

Swap groups

Mark groups

Send back work

Students Do Assignment

Marking Session

Q1 Qn

Graph

Text

Text

Q1

Feedback 1

Feedback n

marks

For 1 to No of Questions

For 1 to No in Group

EndDo

EndDo

Q1 Qn

Feedback 1

Feedback n

Feedback 1

Feedback n

marks marks

Author Assignment

QMP

Author Feedback

QMP

Page 10: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

How do we do it?

Page 11: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 12: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 13: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 14: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 15: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 16: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 17: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 18: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 19: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 20: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 21: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 22: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 23: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 24: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin
Page 25: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What did the students think?

Page 26: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What did the students think?

Page 27: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What did the students think?

“The bit I liked is that you didn’t just have to be just you: it was

everyone and it made you think of what other people think of

answers; because my line of thought about someone who

answered a question differently to how I answered was that it

might be wrong; but when someone explains it to you and when

we talk it through it gets far more meaning and you understand it

better and I understand the different ways you can answer

questions far more.”

“There were lots of examples of ways to get it wrong

as well You can see how a lot of people waffle in their

answers. We can tell what is waffly and what is

straight to the point. I think that was the best”

Page 28: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

What did I think?

Page 29: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

How will we develop it?

Page 30: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Perspectives

Page 31: Peer feedback - Paul McLaughlin

Acknowledgments

• Principal’s Teaching Award Scheme

• Peter Ng (author)

• Mark Findlay (help with QMP)