Summary: The Importance Of Peer Marking

Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-250. doi:10.1080/0260293960210304

This paper details the results of method, which evaluated both formative and summative assessment. Two assessment criteria were compared; student-peer marking and tutor marking. The comparison indicated that the results of student-peer marking might be misleading as a guide to the validity of peer assessment. Analysis of student feedback forms showed that students not only liked carrying out peer assessment, but also felt the benefits in terms of developing facets of their learning process and heightening their awareness of their work. The author

It includes chapters that deal with relevant, contemporary aspects of the feedback process including peer feedback, online feedback, learner-centred feedback, feedback formulation, as well as feedback on specific skill areas. The various chapters present a blend of theoretical overviews, action research-based empirical studies, and practical implications. Therefore, the mixture of theoretical considerations, documentations, beliefs, experiences, materials, practices and advice are written with a teacher’s voice. There is sufficient evidence to support the selection of some of the methods of feedback in the treatment in my research, like, using scales in feedback. However, the volume needs to be tempered accordingly because it covers a range of maturities and language modalities outside the scope of my research, and it is not based on Japanese research. The edited book should serve as an important reference in my literature

These studies suggest that collaborative writing provides learners with opportunities to learn through a discussion of the language they are using. The author suggests that working in pairs, and receiving feedback on writing in pairs, can enhance the language learning opportunities for learners through their ability to scaffold each other 's contributions and knowledge. This research assumes that the learners are discussing and deliberating on particular features of the language. While this level of collaboration between peers is implausible in my research, the teacher provides the discussion as peers annotate the corrections. The main conclusions are that discussion about errors combined with indicating the errors are supportive of learning. Therefore, this article provides the necessary evidence to support this approach as a form of treatment for EFL writing beginners. The author indicated the need, at that time, for more research into what extent corrective feedback actually helps learning in general, and even more, for Japanese EFL writing