Earlier this week I was writing about student self-assessment (Persuading students of the value of formative assessment (or otherwise)), and I described a data set which showed that students who participated in formative assessment did better on subsequent summative assessment. A new paper in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education asks the question: Does student engagement in self-assessment calibrate their judgement over time? (Note this is "assessment of self" rather than completing formative assessments)
It turns out that the answer has a large dose of Matthew Effect - the strong get stronger and the weak .... don't.
Does student engagement in self-assessment calibrate their judgement over time? (2013) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, doi: 10.1080/02602938.2013.769198
One of the implicit aims of higher education is to enable students to become better judges of their own work. This paper examines whether students who voluntarily engage in self-assessment improve in their capacity to make those judgements. The study utilises data from a web-based marking system that provides students with the opportunity to assess themselves on each criterion for each assessment task throughout a programme of study. Student marks were compared with those from tutors to plot changes over time. The findings suggest that overall students’ judgements do converge with those of tutors, but that there is considerable variation across achievement levels, with weaker students showing little improvement. Whilst the study is limited by the exigencies of voluntary participation and thus consequential gaps in the data set, it shows how judgement over time can be demonstrated and points to the potential for more systematic interventions to improve students’ judgements. It also illustrates the use of the web-based marking and feedback software (ReView) that has considerable utility in aiding self-assessment research.